ML20205D776: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 17: Line 17:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:}}
{{#Wiki_filter:.                                            .
OR GINAL OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
 
==Title:==
MILLSTONE, UNIT 1 DECOMMISSIONING PUBLIC MEETING 0                        .
Case No:.                                                  -
t Work Order No.:            ASB-300-651 LOCATION:        Waterford, CT DA*IE:    Tuesday, February 9,1999                          PAGES: 1 - 89 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
1025 Connecticut Avenue,NW, Suite 1014
                                                        -Washington, D.C. 20036
                                                    ,      G02) 842 0034
* 245 P$R  DO    O T              PDR
 
7_
1 !
                                                                        \
1                                BEFORE THE                        l 2-                U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3                                    ***
4        MILLSTONE UNIT 1, DECOMMISSIONING PUBLIC MEETING 5                                    ***
,                                                                        l l    6
    .7                                Waterford Town Hall 1
8                                15 Ropes Ferry Road 9                                Waterford, CT 10 11                                Tuesday, February 9, 1999 12              The above-entitled meeting commenced, pursuar t to 13  notice, at 7:00 p.m.                                            !
i 14 f
15  PARTIC7. PANTS:                                                  1 16  On Be'.lalf of the Town of Waterford:
17              TONY SHERIDAN, First Selectman, Town of Waterford 18  On Buhalf of the NRC Staff:
19              DUKE WHEELER, NRC Licensing Project Manager for-20                Millstone Unit 1, Decommissioning Project 21                Directorate 22              DR. MICHAEL MASNIK, Chief, NRC Decommissioning 23                Section 24              PHIL RAY, Project Manager for Millstone Unit 1, 25                Decommissioning Project Directorate ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters
                -1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 l                                (202) 842-0034
 
l                                                                  2 1 PARTICIPANTS:    [ Continued) 2            ETOY HYLTON, Licensing Assistant 3            PATRICIA MILLIGAN, Health Physicist and Nuclear 4              Pharmacist J
5            BILL HUFFMAN,    Staff, Decommissioning Licensing 6              Project Management 7            STEVEN DEMBEK, previous Licensing Project Manager,    l
                                                                      )
8              Millstone Unit 1                                    I l
9            SAM NALLUSWAMI, Decommissioning Project 10              Directorate /NRC 11            DR. RON BELLAMY, Chief of the Decommissioning and      j 12              Laboratory Branch, NRC Region I 13            PAUL CATALDO, Resident Inspection staff, Millstone 14            NEIL SHEEHAN, Public Affairs Office, Region I 15            ANN HODGDON, Esquire, Office of the General 16              Counsel 17            JIM SHEPHERD, Millstone 1 Project Manager 18 19  On Behalf of Northeast Utilities and Millstone Station:
20            FRANK ROTHEN, Vice. President of Site Services, 21              Millstone Station 22  ERNIE HARKNESS, Unit Director for Operations, Millstone 23            Unit 1 24  RON SACHATELLO, Project Manager of Site Characterization, 25            Millstone Unit 1 I
l f                  ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
l                          Court Reporters                          .
1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014                !
Washington, D.C. 20036                      q (202) 842-0034 l
 
I                                                3 1    PARTICIPANTS:  [ Continued) 2    SPEAKERS:
3              SAL MANGIAGLI 4              v8N GUTSHALL 5              PETE REYNOLDS 6              PRALIS BUILDMORE 7'            JOE BESADE 8              JOE AMARELLO 9              GERALYN WINSLOW 10              MARK HOLLOWAY 11              EVAN WOOLCOTT 12              PAUL BLANCH 13              MARY KUHAN 14 1  15 1
16 i.
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
E 4
1                      PROCEEDINGS 2                                                      [7 : 00 p.m.1 3            MR. SHERIDAN:  Good evening, everyone. First of 4 all,'I would like to ask everyone if they could be seated so        j l
5 we can get started.
6            First of all, I would like to thank all of you for 7 co.Aing . I am Tony Sheridan, the First Selectman of 1
8 Waterford, and these other folks at the table, at the 9 various tables here, will be introduced as we progras'.
10            I would like to start by trying to establich come 11 groundrules. This is really a new era for the town of 12 Waterford. Up until now we were talking about ever the 13 years construction and management of plants. Now we are 14 talking about decommissioning Unit 1,    so there's a little        l 2
15 bit of a learning curve we are all going to go.through here.        l 16            We -- I say "we" -- the town of Waterford through 17 our representative, and I think he is here somewhere in the 1
18 audience, I thought I saw him -- George Peteros -- where are        l 19 you, George?    There you are.
20            George has been representing the town of Waterford 21 on the Citizen Advisory Committee at the Haddam Neck plant, 22 so we are all trying to educate ourselves.
23            I want to thank the NRC people for coming tonight 24 to start this public process, and also the NU people for 25 being here to outline what they and how they hope to go ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
5 1 about decommissioning Unit 1.
2            In an effort to be fair with everyone, I think it 3 is important that we try to first and foremost respect 4 everyone's opinion. Everybody has an opinion and'it is a 5 public meeting and we would appreciate that bit of common 6 courtesy.
7          The second thing I would like to suggest is that 8 we restrain our remarks to about three minutes each first 9 time around. These people have agreed to be here up until 10 10 o' clock and if the meeting ends earlier than that they 11 will also hang around and have individual questions asked of 12 them, so if we could agree to that, we'll try to be fair 13 with everybody, give everyone a fair opportunity to be heard 14 and also I am told this is the first of a number of meetings 15 we will have.
16          So tonight is really the beginning and with that I 17 would like to remind everybody that there is a sign-up sheet 18 at the back of the room. If you want to speak, please sign 19 up and when you come forward to speak, I would appreciate it 20 if you would for the record identify yourself, so that we 21 know who you are and that if there is a follow-up question 22 to be answered that we know where to send it and who to 23 address it to.
24          There is a second sheet in the back of the room      {
25 for individuals who may want a transcript -- I believe that ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014                !
Washington, D.C. 20036                        I (202) 842-0034 i
 
6 1 is what you want to have happen -- a transcript sent to them 2 of the meeting. I think that is important for the record
  '3  and if you know of somebody who would like to know what is 4 going on with these meetings, please put their name and 5 address on the second sign-up sheet and we will see that --
6 NRC will see that the transcript of the meeting is forwarded 7 to that individual.
8            Okay. We have an agenda. What I would like to do 9 at this time is to introduce Duke Wheeler, who is the lead
                                                                      )
10  person -- he is the License Project Manager for i
11  Decommissioning of Unit 1 and ask if Duke-then would 12  introduce the NRC folks who are here to help answer any 1
13  questions.
1
.14              I know there's been a lot of interest in all of 15  the units out there and I want to really establish this rule 16  for this evening. These people are not here to answer        I 17  questions about 2 or 3. They don't have the right technical 1
18  staff with them, so we want to try to limit our comments and 19  questions to the decommissioning process of Unit 1.            i So                                                      i 20              With that,. Duke, if you could start I would A
21  appreciate it.
22              MR. WHEELER:  Thank you, Tony.
23        ,
Good evening and thank you for taking time to come 24  to this meeting with the NRC Staff to participate in our 15  regulatory program for the decommissioning of Millstone Unit
  .                  ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
r 1
7 1 1. As Tony mentioned, I am Duke Wheeler and I am the 2 Licensing Project Manager for Millstone Unit 1 in our 3 Decommissioning Project Directorate.
4            We transferred Unit 1 from our Special Projects i
5 Of fice to the Decommissioning Project Directorate shortly 6 after we received certification from the licensee that Unit    ,
                                                                    )
7 1 had permanently ceased operations and that the fuel had 8 been permanently removed from the reactor vessel, so please 9 note that the licensing actions for the decommissioning of 10 Millstone Unit 1 are being supervised by a different part of 11 the NRC Staff organization than licensing actions for Units 12 2 and 3.
13            We understand that substantial interest and 14 attention may also exist for Unit 2 and 3, but those plants, l
15 as Tony meationed, are beyond the scope of this evening's
                                                                    )
16 meeting and we don't have a full complement of NRC Staff 17 present tonight to address interests related to our 18 oversight of Units 2 and 3.
19            Before going any further, I would like to 20 introduce the rest of the NRC Staff who is here this 21 evening.
l 22            Dr. Seymour Weiss was going to be here but he was  i 23 unable to make it. He is the Director of the Non-Power 24 Reactors and Decommissioning Project Direccorate.              l 25            Dr. Michael Masnik, to my right, is the Chief of    i ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.                    i Court Reporters                          l 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014                l Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
1 8
1  the Decommissioning Section under Dr. Weiss, and he is my 2  immediate supervisor. He supervises 14 Project Managers 3  such as myself who are involved in various aspects of the 4  decommissioning program which at the present time includes 5  decommissioning related activities at 18 nuclear power 6  plants across the country.
7            One of those 14 professionals supervised by Dr.
8  Masnik is Mr. Phil Ray, who is also working the slide 9  projector, and he is the backup Project Manager in our 10  Decommissioning Project Directorate for Millstone Unit 1.
11            Also with us tonight is Ms. Etoy Hylton. She is 12  our Licensing Assistant and is at the back of the room when 13  you first came in to assist you with getting your names on i
14  the sign-up lists if you have that interest.
15            Ms. Patricia Milligan is with us tonight. She is a 16  health physicist certified by the American Board of Health 17' Physics and she is also a board-certified nuclear 18  pharmacist.
19            Mr. Bill Huffman is one of our more recent 20  additions to the_ Decommissioning Licensing Project 21  Management staff, and he also works for Dr. Masnik.
22            Mr. Steven Dembek is the previous Licensing 23  Project Manager.for Unit 1.
24            We also have with us Mr. Sam Nalluswami, who is on 25  a rotational assignment to our Decommissioning Project          1 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court-Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW,_ Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
9 1  Directorate from our Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and 2  Safeguards.
: 3.            Also with us, to my immediate right, is Dr. Ron 1
4  Bellamy. He is the Chief of the Decommissioning and 5  Laboratory Branch in our Region I office and will follow my l
6  pre'sentation of the Licensing Program with a brief                '
7  discussion of our inspection program for decommissioning 8  power reactors.
9              Mr. Paul Cataldo is with us, and he is 10  representing our Resident Inspection staff here at the site.
11              Mr. Neil Sheehan is here from our Region I Public 12  Affairs Office and Ms. Ann Hodgdon is here and she is an 13  attorney specializing in decommissioning activities in our 14  Office of the General Counsel.
15              From our Office of. Nuclear Materials, Safety and    j 16  Safeguards we also have Mr. Jim Shepherd and he is the
: 17. Millstone 1 Project Manager in that office.
18              What I would like to do this evening is give you a    i 19  brief outline of my presentation for this evening.
O#
Topics I 20  will address are, first of all, a quick comment on just what l
21_  decommissioning really is and then also a few comments on 22  those things.that are not considered to be decommissioning 23  from our perspective.
24              I will comment on what the NRC's focus is during 25  the decommissioning process and I will identify some              !
l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
10 1  alternatives that are available to the licensee during the 2 ' process. I'll ta2k about what some of the decommissioning 3 ' process requirements are. I will talk about what the 4  post-shutdown decommissioning activities report is and I 5  will also describe some additional restrictions that we 6  place on the licensee.
7              I will comment on some of the financial aspects of 8  the NRC's decommissioning regulations.
9              Another important document that I will touch on is  )
10  the License Termination Plan.
11              Next I will talk a little bit about 1
12  decommissioning experiences elsewhere. We recognize that 13  this is new to the Waterford community but it is not new to i
14  many other communities across the country.                      !
15              I will also give you some information.on how to 16  contact me at NRC Headquarters as your point of contact for 17  interests that.you might have related to our licensing 18  program for decommissioning power reactors and how it is 19  being applied to Unit 1.
20              The NRC presentation this evening will be 21  concluded by Dr. Bellamy giving a description of the NRC's 22  inspection program for decommissioning plants.
l
-23              First of all, what is decommissioning?              l O
24  Decommissioning is the removal of 4He power plant safely 25  from service and a reduction of the residual radioactive l
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters                          i 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036                        i (202) 842-0034 l
 
11 1  materials at the site to permit release of the property and 2  termination of the license.
3            Some things that are not decommissioning -- this 4  is very important. Decommissioning does not encompass from 5  the NRC's regulatory perspective any non-radiological 6  decommissioning. If you have a facility that has been 7  cleaned of its radioactive contamination and is acceptable 8  for release if the licensee chooses to further clean up or 9  dismantle the facility the costs incurred by such activities 10  are not regulatory decommissioning costs.
as 11            Site restoration activities -- if 4dwr licensee 12  chooses to restore the site to its original character prior 13  to the building of the power plant those costs too are not 14  considered regulatory decommissioning costs.
15            Lastly, spent fuel management and funding -- we 16  have observed that licensees of decommissioning plants 17  across the country spend a significant portion of' time and 18  money dealing with safely managing and eventually disposing 19  of the spent fuel. We expect the same will apply here at 20' Millstone. Those costs associated with the care and 21  management of the spent fuel are not regulatory 22  Edecommissioning costJ.
23            Now what is the NRC Staff's focus during the 24  decommissioning of a power reactor?    Quite simply, the NRC's 25  primary focus is on the removal of radiological hazards.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters                          .
1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014                !
Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034-                          l l
i
 
I 12 1  The first step in that process is to safely remove the' 2  facility from service and then the licensee reduces            )
3  radioactive contamination to levels that will allow release 4  of the site.
I 5            The licensee will then perform a detailed final      '
6  radiological survey and the NRC Staff may perform a 7  confirmatory survey to strengthen our assurance that the 8  site meets the specified criteria for release.
9            Finally, if the release criteria are met and the 10  terms and conditions of the License Termination Plan are met 11  and any hearing conditions that may occur are met, then the    j 12  license may be terminated and at this point NRC regulatory 13  activities would end.                                          )
14            With respect to decommissioning alternatives, the 15, licensee basically has three choices. One choice is to 16  begin decontaminating and dismantling the plant soon after 17- certifying to us that plant operations have been permanently 18  ceased and the fuel permanently removed from the reactor 19  vessel.
20            A second choice is to place the plant in what we 21  call SAFSTOR where decontamination and dismantling            ,
                                                                  )
22  activities are deferred to some later date. Licensees can    )
l 23  choose to take up to 60 years to terminate the license. For  i
                                                                  \
24  example, they could put the plant in long-term storage for 25- 50 years, then take five to 10 years to complete the          j ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
l 13  4
                                                                          )
1 dismantlement and decontamination as long as they complete 2 the process in 60 years.                                          I 3            The third choice that they can adopt is a              j I
4  combination of the first two choices.                              J 5            An important point here is that the NRC has found 6 either of these alternatives or a combination of these            l 7  alternatives to be acceptable.                                    I The risk to the public from    i l
8 decommissioning is significantly reduced from when the            I 9  facility was in operation. In recognition of that reduced 10  risk our regulatory requirements may be reduced during 11  decommissioning of-the facility.
12            Now what is involved in the process?    The first 13  thing we expect to see is the certifications from the 14  licensee that they have permanently ceased operations and 15  the fuel has been permanently removed from the reactor 16  vessel. We received these certifications in a letter to the 17  Commission dated July the 21st, 1998.
18            Once these certifications have been submitted the 19  licensee cannot change their mind and go back and operate 20  the plant again. These certifications are a significant 21  step and they are an irreversible action, and as I noted for 22  Millstone Unit 1, they have occurred.
23            Next, we require the licensee to submit a Post 24  Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report within two years 25  of those certifications being docketed. We also require ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 l
 
14 1  that a site-specific decommissioning cost estimate be 2  submitted within the same'timeframe.
3              The_PSDAR is required to provide a description of    u 4-  the planned decommissioning activities and we also expect to 5  see a schedule for the accomplishment of those activities.
WI//
6  We g require that the PSDAR include an estimate of the 7  expected costs associated with decommissioning and we also 8  require the licensee to provide the reasons for which they 9  have concluded that the environmental impact associated with 10  decommissioning is within the existing bounds of the 11~  Environmental Impact Statements associated with the IL  licensing of the facility or our rulemakings regarding 13  decommissioning.
14              Within about two months of receiving the PSDAR,    we 15  will hold another public meeting very similar to.this one in 16  the vicinity of the site.        For Millstone 1 the licensee has 17  not submitted a PSDAR yet, so this meeting tonight is not 18  the PSDAR meeting, so.we will get a chance to have another 19  meeting like this after the.PSDAR is received by us.
20              Also, the NRC Staff does not approve the 21  licensee''s PSDAR,. Instead, we make a determination as to 12 2  whether or not the licensee has submitted the information 23  required by our regulations.        The PSDAR accomplishes several 24  things. It informs the public of the licensee's plans for 25  decommissioning.      It also aids us in planning our inspection ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036
                          ,  . (202) 842-0034
 
i 15 1  activities. It forces the licensee to re-examine their 2  financial resources available for decommissioning and it 3  requires the licensee to evaluate the environmental impacts, 4  as I mentioned a few minutes ago.
5            One comment -- the PSDARs 4 hat we have received in 6  the past_have been relatively small documents, typically 15 7  to 20 pages and this is acceptable for our purposes as long 8  as they include the information required by our regulations.
9            Ninety days after the licensee submits their PSDAR 10  they can begin to actively dismantle the facility if they 11  have chosen the Decon alternative or if they selected the 12  SAFSTOR option they can continue to keep the facility in a 13  safe, stable configuration.
14            Now what are some of the financial aspects of our 15  decommissioning regulations?    We understand that State 16  Public Utilities' Commissions have certain regulatory 17  authority over decommissioning trusts. We have regulations 18  related to the licensee having access to those funds. From 19  our regulatory perspective we allow staged access to those 20  funds. At any time prior to and during decommissioning the 21  licensee would have access to up to 3 percent of the amount 22  of decommissioning trust funds for decommissioning planning 23  purposes. This is for planning, for getting ready for 24  decommissioning. It is not for actual decontamination, 25 ' demonstration projects, or the like.
,                    ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
l 16 1            Licensees are also permitted access to an 2  additional 20 percent of the decommissioning trust    once we    l 3  have received the Post Shutdown Decommissioning Activities 4  Report.
l 5            Once we have received the site-specific 6  decommissioning cost estimate, then they have full access to 7  the decommissioning trust fund from our perspective. Our 8  regulations are in addition to and do not take the place of    I 9  Public Utilities Commission controls. Licensees must comply 10  with both sets of regulations.
l 11            There are some additional restrictions placed on 12  licensees once they begin the decommissioning process.          l 13  Licensees are prohibited from performing any decommissioning 14  activity that would foreclose the release of the site for 15  possible unrestricted use. They are also prohibited from l
16  performing any activity that would result in a significant    l 17  environmental impact that has not been previously considered 1
18  or evaluated. Likewise, they are also prohibited from 19  performing an activity that results in or no longer provides 20' reasonable assurance that adequate funds will be available 21  to complete the decommissioning.
        '22            When a licensee approaches the end of the 23  decommissioning program, within two years of the time they 24  expect the license to be terminated we expect to receive a 25  License Termination Plan. In this plan we expect to see, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters                          i 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 u_ ____
 
17 1 among other things, a detailed site characterization. We 2 also expect to see an identification of any remaining 3 dismantlement activities. We expect to see plans for site    ]
4 remediation, detailed plans for the final radiation survey 5 and a description of the end use of the site if the licensee 6 intends that the site be released under restricted 7 conditions.
l 8          We expect to see an updated site-specific cost 9 estimate regarding the residual costs for finishing the 10 decommissioning of the facility and the site and we would 11 also expect to see a supplement to the environmental report 12 describing any new information or significant changes          l 13 associated with the licensee's termination activities.
14          When we receive the License Termination Plan, we 15 will notice receipt of it in the Federal Register and it 16 will be made available for public comment. Likewise, since 17 we approve this plan by a license amendment, there will also l
18 be an opportunity for a public hearing and the NRC will once 19 again hold a public meeting similar to this one in the 20 vicinity of the site.
21          Once the licensee completes their site radiation 22 survey or concurrently with that survey the NRC Staff may 23 perform an independent confirmatory survey. The license 24 will then be terminated, as I indicated earlier, once we are 25 satisfied that the site has met the applicable release ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
18 1    criteria, any conditions or terms that are imposed by the
: 2. License Termination Plan, and any conditions resulting from 3    our hearing process.
'4                Now this concludes my overview of the licensing 5  aspects of our regulatory process for decommissioning power 6    reactors. Although the decommissioning of a nuclear power 7  plant is new to the Millstone and Waterford community, you 8  do share this experience with other communities around the 9  country. Currently there are 21 reactors that have started 10    the decommissioning process.      Three of these facilities have 11-  actually completed the process.
12                There are 18 other reactors now including 13    Millstone 1 in decommissioning.      Five of them are currently 14  z being dismantled. There'are 12 facilities that are 15    -currently in SAFSTOR and we-have not yet been informed yet 16    of the decommissioning option that the licensee will select 17    for Millstone Unit 1, so as you can see, the NRC Staff has a 18    lot of experience in the decommissioning of nuclear power-19    plants.
20                Lastly, I would like to leave you with my name as 21    a point of contact for questions related to the NRC 22-  - licensing. program for the decommissioning of nuclear power 23    plants. Please feel free to contact me at NRC Headquarters.
24                At this time I would like to turn the microphone 25    over to Dr. Bellamy, who will discuss the program he ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
1
                                                                          )
1 19 i    supervises for our inspections'at decommissioning power 2    reactors. Thank you for your attention.
3              MR. BELLAMY:  What we have done in Region I is 4  basically to recognize that the decommissioning projects 5    that are being undertaken in Region I are a significant part 6  of our work activity and have created a specific branch that 7  solely looks at the decommissioning projects in Region I and 8  that is the branch that I presently manage. In addition to 9  the decommissioning projects, I also have under me the 10    responsibility for the Region I radiological laboratory that 11    is in our office in King of Prussia and also the independent 12    measurements mobile radiological van which is still 13    operational I have at my disposal if I decide that it needs 14    to be brought here or any other site in the region for 15    independent measurements of the licensee radiological 16    samples.
17              The distinction between a station with operating 18    and permanently shutdown reactors is significant when it 19    comes to how the region will perform its inspection 20    activities. Here at the Millstone station because of Units 21    2 and 3 we have a significant pool of resources that we will 22    use as the decommissioning is undergone to help us with the 23    inspection activity.
24              I will be in continuous contact with them, my i'
25    staff will be in contact with them, and we will be able to ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
}                              Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
20 1    determine what the appropriate mix is of both resident and 2    regional specialists that will be able to come out here and 3    perform the. required inspection activities, and a little 4    later I will get into what those inspection activities are.
5                    The present resident < effort is periodic tours.
6    They are doing that a little more frequently.than monthly
: 7. now, but I think that is what we will start with to ensure 8    that there is no degradation of the racility, they are 9    attending the planning meetings that are being undertaken at 10    the site, and they are keeping both the Regional office and 11    the Headquarters Staff aware of developments, and again that 12    is a significant resource that we have a great luxury here 13    at the site to use.
14                    Duke indicated that there has been a significant 15    experience of decommissioning within the NRC and most of 16    that has been in Region I-if you go back and take a look at 17    it.
18                    Yankee Rowe is now completing its dismantlement 19    and decontamination activities.
20                    Maine Yankee has completed site characterization.
21    They have selected ~a contractor as a decommissioning
                                                                                                            ~
22    operations contractor to come in and run that facility for 23    them. '
A spent nuclear fuel island has been established.                                        ,
I 24    They have put the plant is what is called an official cold                                      {
25    and dark status as of December 30, 1998, and they believe ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES,.LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036.
(202) 842-0034
 
21 1        the major dismantlement and decommissioning efforts will 2      begin in the spring of 1999.          At that time there will be a 3      significant influx of radiation specialis.s from the-4      Regional office to ensure that the activities are undergone 5      in a safe and competent manner.
6                    Haddam Neck is continuing its characterization 7      effort and they are now completing their modifications for a 8      similar spent fuel nuclear island.          Their major 9      dismantlement and decontamination efforts are expected to 10        begin in about mid-1999.        They have not selected a 11        decommissioning operations contractor as of this date.
12                    Peach Bottom 1, TMI-2, and Indian Point 1 are in 13        longterm SAFSTOR condition and there is a specifin 14        inspection activity that we do at those facilities.            I have 15        assigned inspectors to each of those facilities and they are 16        required to visit those facilities and do a full inspection 17        at least once a year.        That inspection activity is 18        documented and those inspection reports are available.
19        Those visits are simply to verify that the condition of the 20        facility has not degraded and again I can supplement that in is 21        those situations where there wee a resident staff available, 22        such as Peach Bottom, TMI, and the Indian Point sites'.
23                    The major inspection activities in the region when 24        it comes to decommissioning of reactors are those that are 25        actively undergoing dismantlemerc and decontamination.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
22 1  There is a specific manual chapter that we use to ensure 2  that all of the inspection areas are appropriately covered.
3                                                                                                        The frequency of the inspections ir based a lot on l
4  what is going on at the site.                                                                                                It is based a lot on the 5  input of any members of the public that believe that there 6  is an area that we need to look at.                                                                                                                          It's based on a number 7  of activities.that are folded into what is best use of 8  resources so we can be there at the heightened times of                                                                                                                              ,
I' 9  activity to ensure that the dismantlement and 10  decontamination is being done in a safe manner.                                                                                                                                        .
1 11                                                                                                        The areas of inspection are all-encompassing.                            We l                                                                                                                                                                                            l 12  look at the organization of the licensee, its management and 13  cost controls.                                                                                              We look at how they are doing their safety 14  reviews, how they make changes to their safety reviews and 15, their procedures and how they are going to make 16  modifications to the facility.
17'                                                                                                        We look at their self-assessments.
18  Self-assessments is a significant factor in how we view how 19  the licensee is doing.                                                                                              We look at how they are doing their 20  audits.                                                                                          We look at who is doing their audits.                                  We look at    l i
21  the findings that come out.of those self-assessments and 22  audits and we look at how they track and imp]ement the                                                                                                                                {
23  corrective actions for the findings that they observe.
24                                                                                                        We look at the preparations for reactor fuel 25  handling.                                                                                              We verify that there are certified fuel handlers ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
1 23 1 trained on staff, onsite, and able to perform the reactor 2 fuel handling in a safe and competent manner.
3            We continually look at maintenance and 4 surveillance. Annually we look at cold weather 5 preparations, end#  e look at the safety of the spent  iuel 6 pool. There is a continuous review of occupational 7 radiation exposure. When we get to the final survey stage 9n  /
8 of the plant our activities will-get a ramp-up.      I will have 9  contractors out here in accordance and in agreement with the 10  Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards to do a 9
11  very significant confirmatory effort activity once the 12  licensee's License Termination Plan has been submitted, as 13  already explained.
14            We look at radwaste treatment, we look at the 15  effluents from the plant and we look at the licensee's 16  ability to monitor the effluents and their ability to 17  monitor the environment. We will split samples with them.
18  We will take independent measurements continually and we 19  will verify not only that the licensee's measurements are 20  accurate, but their program to monitor the radioactivity is 21  appropriate and.has the appropriate sensitivity and 22  acc. racy. We will not initiate a program where we will l
! 23  continually monitor the licensee effluents from the plant 24  whether those be solid, liquid or gaseous, but we will do a 25  routine audit to ensure that again, first, we are satisfied l
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
I                          Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
24 1 with their program, and we will independently split samples 2 to verify that those measurements are accurate.
3            We look at the solid radwaste management 4 activities on site both during the decommissioning and 5  dismantlement and at the end when major components are tut W 6 removed and 4Nr look at the transportation of those 7  components and radioactive material offsite.
8            We look at emergency preparedness. We would 9  expec    Jth in the areas of emergency preparedness and 10  physical security that there will be changes to the 11  licensee's program that is now submitted on the docket.      Mr.
12  Wheeler and his staff will review them and make the 13  appropriate licensing reviews and any appropriate changes to 14  the license'and license conditions and then we will do 15  inspections to verify that there is still an adequate state 16  of emergency preparedness.      We will have inspectors out here 17  to actually monitor drills and exercises and again to report 18  on those activities in a written and public forum.
19              We think that.the public involvement in this 20  process is important from a regional perspective as well as 21  from the Headquarters perspective.      All of our inspection 22  reports will continue to be made available to you.      I or 23  appropriate members of my staff will be glad to attend 24  future public meetingc.      We will be here at the PSDAR public 25  meeting that Mr. Wheeler has mentioned and we are also
.                  ANN RILEY % ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
F~
25 4
1  continually availabla for comments, questions or concerns 2  that you may have.
3              The Region I office can be contacted at the (610) 4    number up here. You can either ask for me directly or you 5    can ask for the Decommissioning Branch. They will know who 6  I am and they will get me very quickly. We      have the 7    (800) number that is listed up there.
8              I would also encourage you now        o.n  er that 9    there is resident staff at Millstone. Mr. . al Cataldo is 10    very familiar with the Unit 1 facility. I have listed his 11    number here and again he is also ready, willing and able to 12    take any of your concerns, questions, or comments at any 13    time.
14              You can also get us through the Headquarters 15    Operations Officer. They know how to get I or a member of 16    my staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 52 weeks out of 17    the year, and I can tell you that that process does work, ao 18    if there is something that is of great health and safety 19    significance and you need to talk to somebody, we will find 20    a technical person to talk to you at whatever hour you think 21    it is appropriate.
22              Duke did put his E-mail address on his slide.      I 23    will also tell you that    can also be reached by E-mail.      My 24    E-mail initials are RRB1    C. gov and I wocid be more than 25    willing to accept any E-mail comments, questions or concerns e
r ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
                                    *Mi % M
 
26 l' that you might have.
NHCEL E/2                                        l 2            MR. 4HER+ BAN-    Thank you, Ron. We are at that      I
-3  point in the agenda -- in organizing this meeting _I did 4  invite the utility to join us for a brief description for 5  you of the present status of their decommissioning plans.
6  Mr. Frank Rothen is here with us to do that, and he will do 7  that at this time.
8            MR. ROTHEN:    Thank you, Mr. Wheeler. My name is 9  Frank Rothen. I am the Vice President of Site Services for 10  Millstone Station. I am also the corporate officer 11  responsible for the decommissioning of Millstone Unit 1.
12            With me tonight is Ernie Harkness, who is the Unit 13  Director for Operations at Millstone Unit 1 and also Ron 14  Sachatello, who is going to be working the slides there for 15  us, who is the Project Manager of the Site Characterization 16  at Millstone.
17            Our number one priority is to maintain the unit in 18  a safe condition. We have been working vigorously towards 19  that end as we are coming up with the overall 20  decommissioning plan. We have a number of priorities on the 21  station right now currently, and the number one priority for 22  us is the safe operation of Millstone 3,    followed very 23  closely by the restart of Unit 2.                                I 24            This takes on significance for Unit 1 activities 25-  because we have several' systems on Unit 1 that the Unit 1 i
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.                      j
                                                                      /
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014
                      . Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034'
 
27 '
1-  staff is responsible for'that is required for the operations 2~  of Millstone-Unit 2 and 3 and that is part of our licensing
                                ~
          '3  responsibility.
4              We are in the-process of evaluating and selecting 5'  an effective decommissioning option. As Mr. Wheeler had
          '6  stated, there are two options availabl'e to us. One is 7  SAFSTOR and the other one is dismantlement. We have yet to 8  reach a conclusion on the method that we will use. It is 9  hoped that by.the middle of the summer, hopefully by the end 10    of the second quarter or the beginning of the third quarter 11    we will be able to make that presentation to the NRC and 12    then we.will have a public hearing on that so we can share 13    it with the public.
14              Our overall philosophy is to conduct all work in a 15    safe and planned-manner and I know that there.are times --
        -16    we have been shut down now for 11 months -- since we 17    announced that we are going to go into the decommissioning 18    phase that there's been some frustratien expressed that we 19    are moving quite slowly. We have by law two years and in 20    order to prepare the PSDAR we feel that it is important that 21    we take the time and in a very deliberate and direct manner 22    look out for the best means we can to come up with a 23  -solution to the problem that will be acceptable not only to 24'  .the regulator but to the public.
25              Our safety performance is not one just from a ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Repo~ ers 102S Connecticut Avenut    NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
28 1  regulatory perspective. We look at industrial safety as 2  being very high on our list also, and that comes through 3  with the careful, dedicated approach. Basically what we 4  have done is gone through work planning activities on a case 5  by case basis. We have taken the time to brief properly all 6  individuals that are working on the unit. We are using a 7  very deliberate process to do that and it has paid off i
8  di'tidends from the industrial safety perspective and that        j 1
9  the unit right now currently, I am proud to say, has had 10  over 720,000 man-hours without a lost time accident and in 11  this past year the unit was given the President's Award from 12  Northeast Utilities for.being the safest plant in their 13  system.
14            AUDIFNCE PARTICIPANT:    Bravo, bravo.
15            MR. ROTHEN:  Negotiations are underway. currently 16  to sell the new fuel assemblies that we had purchased when 17  we thought the unit was still going to be operational.      We    l 18 ~ had purchased a partial core at that time. There were a lot 19  of questions on what we were going to do with that fuel.      We scWccJ of%tr 20  are currently in negotiations with 44we utilities looking for 21  the best possible method to sell that fuel and move it 22  offsite and we will be in contact with the regulator when we 23  decide to do that.
24            Offsite radiological monitoring -- there have been 25  a lot of concerns raised in the community about radiological 9
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
29 1  issues that have come up, whether or not they were safe, if 2  there"was any of the-contamination issues associated with
    .3  Millstone that might be in the community.
4'            We had at the time of construction of the facility 5  at Millstone Station we had given a lot of fill to various 6  areas in the community. We had given fill to Harkness State 7  Park and we had given fill to the ballfields. There is a 8  huge mound of dirt out there on the property that has also 9  ccme into question. There was issues raised by a number of 10  citizens as to whether or.not it was safe for their people 11  to use those ballfields. There was issues raised by the 12  First Selectman, Tony Sheridan, and we have gone out and 13  'done numerous surveys. . The NRC has done numerous surveys.
14  The DEP has done numerous surveys. The ballfields in 15  Waterford alone we did surveys that amounted to over 100,000 16  check-points on that field. We did a pattern that was 17  broken down into squares the size of a foot and over 100,000 18  samples were taken in those areas, as measurements were l  19  taken to verify that in fact every inch of that ballfield 20  was safe, and we are proud to say that the DEP sent a letter      l l
21  to the Town of Waterford this past week confirming that all 22  their independent surveys, which were as extensive as 23  Millstone's, verified the fact that these areas are 24  radiologically free of any contamination.
25              As I said earlier, the surveys involved the i
I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.                        ,
Court Reporters                              i 1025' Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 342-0034
                                                                            )
 
30 1 Waterford ballfielde, the Harkness State Park and the 2 Waterford landfill. The surveys included direct radiation 3 measurements, field radiation scans, soil sample analysis, 4 and again ru) Millstone-produced radioactivity was detected 5 at any of these offsite locations.
6          The Year 2000 readiness, the Millennium -- big 7 issue. Everybody is bringing it up. We have had a 8 presentation at the request of CRC at the Waterford Library    1
                                                                  )
9 about a week and a half ago where there was a large debate 10 about that. We have another one planned on the 18th for the 11 Nuclear Energy Advisory Commission. We will be making a 12 presentation there.
13          There really is, as we have gone through this 14 review we have a mandate from the NRC to be able to be Y2K 15 compliant and have a plan in place by July 1st of this year.
16 We are comfortable that we are on target to be able to meet 17 that objective.
18          We have had independent surveys done of our 19 program and it has been audited by people outside of 20 Northeast Utilities to verify that we are meeting the intent 21 of the plan and program. In the case of Unit 1 we find that- I l
22 there are no systems in need of remediation and right now      {
i
{
23 the bulk of the systems on Millstone Station in general        j l
24 terms we find that there is very little remediation that we 25 have identified that is required on any of the safety ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
m                                                                      1 31
: 1. systems. -Basically the vintage of the plants are such that 2  because of their age almost any of the computer systems that 3  we have tied in are basically for monitoring those systems 4  and not the actual control and operation of those systems as 5  is.the case on-some of the newer plants.
6            We have contingency plans we are formulating right 7  now. One of the concerns that we have that deals with Y2K 8  is the services we receive offsite -- offsite power,. water, 9  communications and those issue that are outside of our 10  control. We are developing currently contingency plans to 11  make sure that we are able to safely and effectively operate
  -12  our plants and in the case of Millstone Unit 1 maintain our 13  plants even if we do have some disruptions from outside the 14  station.
15            A regulatory update -- basically we have submitted 16  a license amendment for fuel handler status on the unit that 17  is currently with the NRC under review. We have additional 18  tech spec revisions that we are working on right now that we 19 fAcf nrt--
will be submitting at a later date as completed by the          1 20  planning group that is onsite working on that process.
21            Our plans for decommissioning, as I said earlier, 22  that we are reviewing two options, and both of them deal 23  with the cost perspective of what is the most efficient way
                                                                      ]
24  to go. We have to submit those plans not only to the NRC 25  but we have to docket that plan with the Connecticut DPUC.
ANN'RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C.-20036 (202) 842-0034
 
32 1  We are scheduled to give an estimate to the DPUC at the 2  April hearings. We are in the process of doing that,          l 3  revising the initial estimate, right now to them, and they 4  will make a determination on how much money and what funds 5  are available to us to do the complete decommissioning, so 6  it is important that we act in a prudent manner and that the 7' funds that are allocated are sufficient for us to do an          i 8  effective job and do it safely.      We are in the process of    l 9  evaluating that right now.
10              We are also looking at the possibility of using 11  what is commonly referred to as the DOC, the Decommissioning 12  Operations Contract, similar to what was used at Maine 13  Yankee. We haven't come to any firm conclusions on that.
14  There are several proposals that we are reviewing right now 15  and we hope to be able to make a decision by the.end of the 16  second quarter of this year.
17              Again, the PSDAR, Post Shutdown Decommissioning
'18  Activities Rep 7rt will be submitted in the middle of this 19  year.
20              The major milestones.to date:    The Unit was shut
              ~
: 21. down on 11-4-95. We submitted the 50.82 letter in July of 22  1998. We had our first public meeting at the White Flint 23  facility with the NRC on December 2nd and the first public 24' meeting is of course -- for the NRC is today so another 25  major milestone in the process.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014
                      ' Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
33 1            We have key submittals that we will be making to 2  the regulator over the next six months. We have a 3  decommissioning schedule that we are working on right now.
4  We have a team working on the station to put that'in place 5  so we'll be able to make a public presentation on it, and 6  like I say we are looking to. submit the PSDAR in the third 7  quarter of this year, hopefully.
8            Decision on the DOC is something that we want to        '
9  do this year and I think it shouldn't take us until the end fir m
.10 .of the year. We should be in a pretty position to make that 11  decision by the middle of the year. I know the slide says l
12  the 12th but we are hoping to do it sooner than that.            )
13            Primarily the major consideration we have is for 14  our people who are working there. People have been on that 15  unit for a long time. A lot of them have spent their entire 16  career there, 20 or more years, and a difficult decision 17  when you decide to shut a unit down like that. I have to 18  admit I am very proud of the performance of those 19  individuals. We have been.able to maintain the material 20  condition of the unit at a very high state of readiness.        ,
21  People are very.much aware of what their responsibilities 22  are. They meet very high standards when it comes to 23  maintaining systems for the two operating units and we are 24  looking to be able to come up with a final plan not just for Ao A /X4/ p d b .40 p          j 25  the public and the NRC but for the g q ? w .                      i k 5 W Cortou          Af& %        &Y            cd
    % % w A4ee              /t A_- .
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.                          ;
Court Reporters                                i 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202)'842-0034 I
 
34 1          So vith that said, Duke, I appreciate the 2 opportunity to give you the update.
3          MR. WHEELER:    Thank you, Frank. We are the point 4 on our agenda now where we are going to open the meeting up 5 for members of the public to make comments and ask questions 6 of the NRC staff that is assembled here this evening, and 7 also any questions that they may wish.to direc      oward the 8 licensee representatives that are here. Andy 2c-1 ding t:
9 the sign-up list, please.
10          MR. SHERIDAN:    For the purpose of those of you who t
11 came in late, again, let's -- to try and make sure everyone 12 has an opportunity to speak, I would ask those of you to, 13 first of all, pronounce your name so that the recorder can 14 make a record of it, and, secondly, to restrict your 15 comments, if you may, to approximately three minutes, and 16 that way we can go around a second time if people have 17 follow-up questions. So with that, Rosemary, you are on 18 first.
19          MS. BASSILAKIS:    Good evening, my name is Rosemary    I 20 Bassilakis, I live in Haddam. I am with the Citizens 21 Awareness Network. Somebody has to go first, I guess it is 22 me tonight, and I probably will come back because I don't 23 think I can do this in three minutes.
24          Just, before I begin to touch on decommissioning,        '
25 I think it is an important time to reflect on some things ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters i
1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 I
Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 C__
 
35 1 about Millstone 1. First of all, I think we should reflect l
2 on the fact that Millstona Point was sacrificed to three        '
3 nuclear reactors. It was once a very beautiful site, it is 4 no longer that. And these power plants proved not to be too 1
5 cheap to meter, nor did they prove to be non-polluting.        I 6          We should think about the millions of curies of 7 radiation that was released into the host community from 8 Millstone Unit 1 alone. Millions of curies of radiation 9 into the host community, it is a real shame.                    l l
l 10          We should think about the hundreds and hundreds of    i l
11 shipments of low level radioactive waste that was moved to 12 Barnwell, South Carolina, and I say moved, because you 13 really don't clean up radioactivity, you simply transport it 14 to another community, and that is exactly what is going to 15 happen with this entire nuclear reactor.
16          We can also reflect on the vast amount of high 17 level radioactive waste that was generated at Millstone 18 Unit 1, high level radioactive waste for which there is no 19 permanent, safe or ethical solution at this point in time.      i l
20 So I just --
I know this is a little bit off the topic, but    l 21 I think it is very important to reflect on these things as 22 we go into the decommissioning mode.
23          Now, we believe, our organization believes that 24 the NRC's new rule is flawed in and of itself. I don't know 25 if people know, but the NRC came up with a new ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
36 1  decommissioning rule back-in 1996. Our organization does 2  plan on challenging this rule, first, through trying to-get i
3  a rule change, and if that doesn't work, then going back to 4  the Appellate Courts and, hopefully, they will understand i
5  our position.                                                  ]
6              And the reasons we believe that we need to 7  challenge this rule is, first of all, the public is not 8  entitled to a hearing on decommissioning until after
: 9. decommissioning is complete, and that is absolutely absurd, 10  to not allow the community to have any input, any real 11  input. Now, it is nice that we have an opportunity to speak
                                                      ~
12  before you tonight, and I do appreciate that, but we have no 13  power. Speaking before you is much different than having a 14  .say in what goes on during decommissioning.
15              And you did mention that we can get a. hearing at 16  the end. I assume that you mean during the license 17  termination plan process. Wel], that is only if you can 18  maybe afford to hire an attorney, or if maybe you have the 19  expertise within the organization to come up with 20  contentions that.are acceptable to the Atomic Safety and 21  Licensing Board -- no easy task. It is not just a matter of 22  asking for a hearing, you have to jump through all kinds of 23  hoops, and the NRC knows this, and they should present it as 24  such right from the get-go.
25              The new rule, as you mentioned, doesn't require a ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
l 37 J i
1  detailed decommissioning plan. A post-shutdown              j l
2  decommissioning activity report is all that is required.
3  You mentioned it could be anywhere from 15 to 30 pages.          l I
4  Connecticut Yankee's was 13 pages. The problem with this is t
5  that it does not give the public any way of knowing what is    i 6  going to go on at that reactor and how they will be            {
7  impacted. It is vague, it lacks any detail for which we can i
8  understand these things, that is the problem.
9            And once it is submitted, within 90 days, they can    ,
10  begin doing major dismantlement activities. The NRC doesn't l l
11  have to approve the plan, but within 90 days they can begin 12  cutting apart highly irradiated piping and shipping them on      l 13  barges or trucks or railways. This is a problem.
1 14              Because decommissioning is not considered to have 15  significant potential to impact health and saf.ety, there is    1 16  less NRC oversight. Now, it is true, maybe the community 17  will be less impacted, but the workers -- the workers are 18  highly impacted because they are the ones that are going to 19  be cutting apart, stripping, dissolving, you name it, the 20  highly irradiated components over there, and for that 21  reason, we believe an NRC inspector should be on site.
22              And, lastly, as far as the rule goes, and why we 23  oppose it, the rule no longer classifies decommissioning as 24  a major federal action, therefore, licensees aren't subject 25 : to the National Environmental Policy Act standards, and we i
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025' Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 l
(202) 842-0034 l
 
38 1- believe this is actually illegal, and that nuclear reactors 2  do have to do site-specific Environmental Impact Statements 3  to see how decommissioning will impact the environment.      So 4  we do plan on challenging this rule.
5              Are you timing?
6-            .MR. SHERIDAN:  We21, I think I am being very 7  liberal right now.
8              MS. BASSILAKIS:  Okay. Well, I will come back. I 9  have no problem --
10              MR. SHERIDAN:  Would you mind, because I think --
11              MS. BASSILAKIS:  No problem.
12              MR. SHERIDAN:  In fairness to everybody else.
13              MS. BASSILAKIS:  I will even collect my thoughts.
14              MR. SHERIDAN:  Before you leave, I would like to 15  give you a letter, if you don't mind, from -- give me that 16  mike. This is a letter from Dr. Wiles from the Connecticut 17  Radiation Monitoring Department, and I get very nervous, 18  ac'tually, as you can imagine, when I hear people talk about 19  the excess radiation than leaks from Millstone.      I just want 20  to reiterate Frank Rothan's comments from earlier, I think 21  that letter outlines the extensive studies that were done on 22  all the ball fields surrounding Millstone, which,-
'23  essentially, encompasses the plant, and I would really 24  appreciate if you could read that, and I would be happy to 25  chat with you, and I am sure others would at another date.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
39 1            Now, next on the list is Sal. Sal.
2            MR. WHEELER:  Tony, one note here, if you could 3 make sure that I am provided a copy of that letter, 'aecause 4 I would like to get as complete a record of this meeting as 5 I can, and I would like to attach it to the transcript.
6            MR. SHERIDAN:    I will be happy to do that.
7            Go ahead, Sal.
8            MR. aANGIAGLI:    Good evening, my name is Sal 9 Mangiagli. I live in Haddam, Connecticut, a mile from the 10 Connecticut Yankee reactor, and I am with and for the 11 Citizens Awareness Network.
12            I would like to talk about this grand illusion of 13 radioactive waste being, you know, trucked off to another 14 site as if it disappears and, as if, you know, you clean up 15 a site and there is, you know, no problem with radioactive 16 waste management.
I 17            And I have a report here from the South Carolina    l l
18 Department of Health and Environmental Control, Bureau of l
19 Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Division of 20 Radioactive Waste Management, and the report is tritium        l 21 migration at the Barnwell low level radioactive waste          l l
22 disposal facility, January 9th, 1995. As of that date, they l 23 found tritium leaking from the Barnwell site and it says 24 here that the monitor well was located on the Chem Nuclear 25 property, approximately 2,200 feet south of the disposal ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Cor.necticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
r 40 1  trenches. The tritium plume is now approximately 3,100 feet 2  long and has a width which tapers as it moves towards Mary's 3  Branch. Mary's Branch is a creek on the edge of the 4  property that this tritium is heading towards. The width is 5  generally considered to be 750 feet for calculation 6  purposes. The approximate surface area of the plume is, 7  therefore, 46 acres.
8            This is the Barnwell low radioactive waste dump 9  where Millstone -- where Northeast Utilities will be
  ~ 10  shipping their radioactive waste. This is unacceptable, 11  this is very low tech technology, where they are burying 12  radioactive waste in unlined, some clay-lined trenches, but, 13  for the most part, unlined trenches.
14            At Connecticut Yankee last year, a representative 15, from Chem Nuclear came up to talk about how wonderful 16  Barnwell is and the technology to deal with these low level, 17  high hazard wastes. And last year, when he was giving his 18  presentation, he talked about some leaks at the site. And 19  when I asked how much of an area the leaks have covered, he 20  told me 100 acres. So in 1995 it was 46 acres, last year it 21  is a hundred acres.
22            This is really, you know, this is an illusion that 23  you are creating, that like this waste just disappears or 24  something, that it is being taken care of and it is a farce 25  and a charade, and it is unacceptable to contaminate another ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
41 1 community -- poor, rural, 46 percent African-American.      It 2 is unacceptable to contaminate another community to clean up 3 your own liability, and to just dump it on another 4 community.
5            Every low level radioactive waste dump in this 6 country has leaked. Of the six radioactive waste dumps 7 nationwide, three have been closed because of excessive 8 leakage. Barnwell is open, a hundred acres isn't excessive.
9            It seems at this time in the Atomic Age, when 10 aging reactors are shutting down prematurely, -- none of 11 them are running their 40 years, they are falling part.          I i
12 They are corroding and they are dilapidating a lot faster        I 13 than anyone anticipated. This is a problem that needs to be 14 addressed, but to just close these reactors and dump then on 15 another community is sickening. You should mandate SAFSTOR 16 -- not until the other reactors are closed and they can take 17 them all apart at once, but you should mandate SAFSTOR for 18 the full 50 years.
19            NRC report, right here, your own documents -- the 20 storage and entombment methods allowed for reduction in the 21 levels of radioactivity over time. NRC studies have shown 22 that after 50 years, the volume of radioactively 23 contaminated material would be reduced to one-tenth of the 24 original volume as a result of radioactive decay.      What is 25 the rush, guys?  A tenth of the radioactive decay -- that ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0094
 
rL 3                                                                    42 4
1    the workers have to deal with, that the drivers in the, 2    trucks that are going to be driving your garbage down there 3    will have to deal with, the people at the truck stops.
4                God forbid there is any accidents with these 5    shipments. The police aren't informed. The emergency 6    preparedness people aren't aware.      What about a fire with 7    one of these trucks crashing on the highway and that diesel 8    fuel burning?    What is going to happen to those lofted          l I
9    nuclides?    Who is going to deal with that?                        l 10                There is no rush. There is no rush at all. A 11    delay in dismantling a plant would also result in lower radI0:00A 12    exposure to the workers involved.      This is NRC's document.
A 13    The only reactor sites that are using SAFSTOR are the ones 14    that are multi-complex sites, because it is cheaper for the 15    utility to dismantle those reactors all at once.
16    Connecticut Yankee is using the strip-and-ship method.        It 17    is fast, it is dirty, it is cheap, and we believe it is
  '18    illegal.
19                I believe that the NRC should mandate SAFSTOR.        In I W6N[                                                            1 20    theA20 -- in the next 10 years, with deregulation of the 21    electric industry. coming, it is projected that 25 reactors 22    are going to be prematurely shutting down.      The floodgates 23    of waste are just beginning to open.      Tons and tons and tons 24    af radioactive garbage, plumbing, and piping, and concrete,        I l
25    and liquid, and solid and -- where is it all going?      You are  '
                          -ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
n 43 1  just going to throw it in.the ground and let it leach out?
2- It is unacceptable.      Mandate SAFSTOR.
3              MR. SHERIDAN:    Thank you. The next person on the 4  list is Jen Gutshall.
5              [ Applause.)
6              MS. GUTSHALL:    My name is Jennifer Gutshall, I.am 7  from New Haven, Connecticut.      First, I would like to just 8  express my frustration with the comment that has been made 9  at least five times about the Nuclear Regulatory 10  Commission's extensive experience with decommissioning.        As 11  far as I understand, this is only the second boiling water l
12  reactor to have been facing decommissioning, which has --          )
i 13  because of that set-up, has its own specific and inherent          l l
14  problems, and issues.                                              j 15              I also want to note that I did participate in the 16  preliminary hearing up at -- regarding Yankee Rowe up in 17  Greenfield, Massachusetts, and I know that in order to +wm4?
18  even have gotten that hearing, which you would think, you 19  know, it is in the public interest, the public should have 20  an ability to comment on things that vitally and directly 21  affect them, yet, I know that when Citizens Awareness 22  Network and the Nuclear Coalition on Nuclear Pollution ewRr
      .n69d 23  et their contentions that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 24  responded by forcing Citizens Awareness Network to say it in 25  just the precise way, with the precise words, in the precise ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
44 l l
l' format, with the precise jargon, to be accepted.into this 2  process.
3            We are not lawyers, we don't have the money to          l 4  hire lawyers, we are the public.      If it takes individuals to 5  raise money, who don't have money, to raise money from other
>6  people who do not have money, to hire a lawyer to put it in 7  specific languagt so that you can understand that, when you        I 8  know damn well what we are saying, it is an outrage, an 9  utter outrage.
                                                                        ]
10              And I-just want to leave one last question, leave 11  with one last question. How much radioactivity to do you 12  plan to leave behind a'ter you decommission?      How much 13  radioactivity do you plan to leave with this .:ommunity af ter 14  it has already been dumped on for years and years and years?
15              AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:    That is a quest. ion, it 16  should be answered.
17              MS. GUTSHALL:    And that is a question. I am not 1
18  really sure if this --
19              AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:    The NRC should be              ]
l 20  answering.                                                        !
l 21              MR. SHERIDAN:    Could I suggest that there are two 22  questions?  One was the -- the first one was the boiler          l 23  reactors, there was a comment made that there were two 24  boiler reactors decommissioned. Is that a correct i
25  statement?
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
45 1            MR. MASNIK:    Actually, I believe there are four.
U&llci ros 2  Humboldt Bay, Valeeidae Boiling Water Reactor, Big Rock nod 3  Point, and Millstone.
: 4.            MS. GUTSHALL:    Is Big Rock in -- how far is Big 5' Rock into their decommissioning?
6            MR. MASNIK:    They have begun dismantlement.
7            MS. GUTSHALL:    Okay.
8            MR. MASNIK:    I'm sorry. I'm Mike Masnik, for the 9  transcript.
10            MR. SHERIDAN:    And the'second question had to do 11  with --
12'            MS. GUTSHALL:    How much radioactivity do you plan  l 13  to leave behind in Waterford, in this poor community that 14  has already been dumped on for years?
15            MR. MASNIK:    The Commission will require the        ,
I 16  licensee to submit a license termination plan, and the 3
17  current standards require the licensee to clean up the site 18  to a level where the dose to an individual is less than 25 19  millirem a year.
20            MS. GUTSHALL:    Isn't it correct that the 1
21  definition of the individual, the standard individual, is a 22  200 pound male who spends eight hours on site,a day, and who 23  gardens 1-percent of the time?    Now, I am not all that 24  familiar with Waterford, but I assume there are some farms 25  around here, and I assume there are some women, and I assume ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
                          . Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
46 1  there are some children. 1And I assume there are some          ]
2  individuals with particular illnesses that -- particularly 3  Lyme Disease, which cause a certain sort of immune 4  deficiency. Wouldn't it be proper to define that standard      ,
5  on how much an individual -- (1), to redefine how much          I 6  radiation an individual can receive,'but, (2) redefine who 7  is receiving it to suit the most affected type of person, J
8  particularly a child?
9            MR. MASNIK:    I think'we discussed thic last week, 10  but -- again, Mike Masnik. It is a 70 kilogram individual, 11  which is about 153 or 154 pounds, and it is a male.
12            MS. GUTSHALL:    But it is not a pregnant woman, it-13  is not an elderly mother, it is not --
14            MR. MASNIK:  No, it is not.
15            MS. GUTSHALL:    -- a tiny child, it is.not a fetus.
                                    ~
16            MR. MASNIK:  No , it is not.
17            MS. GUTSHALL:    And it is true that these 18  individuals are most -- what is the word?
19            AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:    Vulnerable.
20            MS. GUTSHALL:    Vulnerable. Vulnerable. And that 21  to be really safe, to really take Waterford, the ccmmunity, 22 .its individuals, the people that live here into 23  consideration in a fair way, wouldn't it be more appropriate 24  to define that standard on the most vulnerable?
25            AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:    Yes.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
47 1                MR. BELLAMY:                                This is Ron Bellamy.                                                                I think what 2 Mike has expressed so far is what the FRC standard is.
3                MS. GUTSHALL:                                I understand the standard.
4                MR. BELLAMY:                                The other part of the regulation is 5  the "as low as reasonably achievable" criteria.                                                                                                  And the 25 6  -- it is 25 millirem or as low as reasonably achievable.
7 And we will.take a look at exactly what the specific 8 situation is at Waterford or any other community in the area 9 of Millstone or any other plant to ensure that the 25 10  millirem and the "as low as reasonably achievable" criteria 11  are satisfied.
12                MS. GUTSHALL:                                Twenty-five millirem exposure to a 13  child, compared to.25 millirem exposure to a 200 pound male 14  is very different.
: 15.              MR. BELLAMY:                                You are absolutely right.                                                                You are 16  absolutely right.
17                MS. GUTSHALL:                                I hope you can look at pregnant 18  mothers in this community who are concerned about the health 19  of their children and say the same thing.                                                                                                  Thank you.
20                MR. BELLAMY:                                I think -- can I?
21                MR. SHERIDAN:                                Go ahead.
12                MR. BELLAMY:                                I think to put it in perspective 23  now, you have to remember that a dental X-ray is generally 24  around 20 millirem, number one.                                    And, number two, natural                                                                                        i 25  background radiation in this area is about'250 millirem a ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Feporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
l
                                      ]                                                                                                48 1    year.                  So the 25 millirem a year is l'0 percent of natural 2    background which you are joing to get whether Millstone 3:    Station was here or whether Millstone Station was not here'.
4                              MS. GUTSHALL:                    .I understand pregnant women don't 5    generally get dental X-rays.
I l                                  6                              MR. SHERIDAN:                    Well, let's -- Pete.Reynolds is
                                                                                                                                          ]
i 7    next on the list.                                                                                I J
8                              MR. REYNOLDS:                    My name is-Pete Reynolds, I live in 9    Waterford.                        And I am a 210 pound male, and I was highly 10'      exposed at Millstone, I used tc work there.                                    So people here 11      do have concerns, and I want to congratulate you gentlemen
                              -12        on coming here, you know, considering what has been going on 13        at Waterford for the past couple of years, our dealings with 14      .the NRC, and Mr. Rothan for getting up and giving his 15      presentation, I know him quite well, probably too well.
                            -16'                                    But getting down to the point of Unit 1,                    the first 17        thing,1 Northeast Utilities made the profit.                                  Waterford made 18        profit by their low taxes, that's-one of the reasons I moved 19        here.                  So safe storage, in the light of everything else, 20      'does seem like a good idea.                                    So it is going to take 50 21        years.
Look at this way, like Rothan said, the employees at A
22        Millstone Unit 1, you could probably keep half the people 23        there for 50 years, so that's one way of looking at it.                                    You 24        make the profit, you got to bite the bullet somewhere along                                      i l
25        the line.                    Businesses do that, they have to accept the ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036.
(*02) 842-0034 1
  . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . .        . . . . . . . . . . .    . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _                _______          _____      1
 
49 1                              risks. And the last I remember, Northeast Utilities, they 2                              don't have the funds to decommission Connecticut Yankee, 3                              they don't have the funds that were set aside to 4                              decommission Unit 1.
5                                          So in the next 50 years, technology is going to 6                              zoom. And not only that, but maybe the U.S. Government will 7                              get off their butt and do something about high level I
8                              radiation storage. But it is feasible, especially with the 9                              multi-plant that they have, it would be cheaper for 10                                    Northeast Utilities to dismantle a?' of them at once, which 11                                    they could start doing now, it wouli    N bother me, than do 12                                    one at a time and incur the same expeates over a three phase 13                                    period, because when Unit 2 is decommissioned, and Unit 3 is 14                                    decommissioned, they are going to go through the same 1
15                                    process. So why not do it all at once. Put Unit 1 in cold 16                                    storage, safe cold storage.
17                                              That's one of the other 'hings. You talk about 18                                    self-assessments at the plant, that Unit 1 received the 19                                    company president's award for being safe the past year.
20                                    Well, it is easy to be safe at a plant when it is not 21                                    operating, producing electricity, that makes it easier.
22                                    They had 720,000 man-hours without a lost time accident.      If 23                                    not performing the amount of work that you would normally do 24                                  .on a plant, that is probably easy to achieve. Plus, you 25                                    have outside contractors coming in, that will add more ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 1
L . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _
 
50 1  man-hours.
2                                      But I remember back in 1991, that there was a lost 3  -- in 1990, there was a lost time accident that never got
: 4. reported, and it helped Millstone achieve a million 5  man-hours.                            So it is hard for me to believe what comes out I
6  of Northeast Utilities about safety.                              And that presents a      j 7  problem with decommissioning, just like the problem we had i
8  at Connect 3-                            Yankee, things not being done right, i
9  short-cuts being taken, improper supervision.                              So it all      l 10  boils down to, you know, we have to believe you, what you 11  are saying, and all the people of Waterford are well aware 12  that that can't be -- just recently, the NRC hid facts from 13  their own Commission so Unit 3                        ,
start up.
14                                      And now you a      hkingapowerplantoffthe i 15, rate-base, the company is not going to be getting any 16  profits form that plant.                              They are going to take all kinds 17' of short-cuts to save money.                              Anybody out to make money is    l l 18  going to do that.                            They are not going to -- we can't rely on 19  the NRC to do their job of regulating this, because the NRC 20  has already said, during a decommissioning, there is not so 21  much to regulate.                            Well, maybe that is because there is no 22  power being put out, but regulations should be adhered to 23  just as though the plant was operating, because it is just 24  as dangerous and probably, in fact, more dangerous                                        )1 i
25  decommissioning that plant, in some phases, than with the                                  i ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters                              ,
1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
_      _____________.-_._______m.__
 
1 51 ;
1 plant operating, because_ things get lax. People do thin ~gs 2  -- well, we are not operating. I have seen it happen just
    .3 during routine shutdowns at Millstone, the attitude, well, 4 we are not running, nothing can happen.
5            Then we have the spent fuel pool where all the
                                                                          ]
6 .high radioactive material is going to be stored. The way 7 the systems are set up, you are going to need half the plant      i i
8 just to keep these pools cool. So that goes back to a safe 9 shutdown, cold shutdown for 50 years. I think we would all 10  be better off. Maybe a lot of us here arguing the point now 11  might be dead by then, and you can do whatever the hell you-      i 12  want, because that is what is going to happen anyway.
13              You are nice, you come here and you tell us the 14  facts of what is going to be done and'everything. Then, in 15  reality, what actually happens -- and we have.no say, 16  because we are only the public. We are only dumb, we don't 17  know nothing about radioactivity. I have got news for you 18  - .we probably know more about it than you do. We know how H19  to do it safely, not profitably. We talk about safety 20  versus cost.
21              I hav.e got an NRC internal report at ho a that the 22  NRC measures the significance of a safety evaluation based 23  on the cost to them, the NRC themselves, plus the cost of 24  the utility. Now, this is from your own office. And you 25  can sit up there and say you are going to do everything i
l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
52 1 safely, not matter what the_ cost, and you can't afford the 2 cost of safety. That is why they shut down Unit 1, it would 3 cost them too much to bring it up to par the way it should 4 have been operated for the past 25 years.
5          So it is hard to believe exactly what you 6 gentlemen are trying to do. I live in Waterford, and I am 7 going to be watching you. And there's means besides courts 8 and I am pretty sure we can raise the money if we have to, 9 to take care of the problem. So don't try to fool us, don't 10 try to bullshit us. Be straight and do it right. That's 11 all.
12          MR. SHERIDAN:    Thank you.
13            (Applause.]
14          MR. SHERIDAN:    Phalis Buildmore. Is Phalis 15 Buildmore --
16          MR. BUILDMORE:    Oh, that's Phalis.
17          MR. SHEPTDAN:    Phalis 18          MR. BU_aDMORE:    Phalis Buildmore.
19          MR.'SHERIDAN:    Are you Phalis?
20          MR. BUILD $ ORE:  Yes, I am Phalis.
21          MR. SHERIDAN:    Please come forward.
22          MR. BUILDMORE:    Thank you. You don't mind.if I 23 expose myself, do you?
24          MR, SHERIDAN:    Well --
25            MR. BUILDMORE:    Just a little.            .
ANN RILEY-& ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
g ,tv. '                            53 1            MR. SHERIDAN:    Try and not get excited. d 2            MR. BUILDMORE:    A little exposure. The NRC has 3 been talking about exposure all night. And you don't mind 4
MAoW if I turn my derriere to you guys, because that is -what  I 5 feel for you.
6            But people, I want to talk to you. My name is-7 Phalis Buildr.iore, and I am a clown. And I have been 8 following this dog-and-pony show all over New England, and 9 they go everywhere. They make all kinds of promises in 10 cryptic language that no one can understand.      They say they 11 are going to do this, and they are going to do that.      And 12 this and that. And that and this. And when it comes down 13 to it, they are going to just leave you all with a mess -- a 14 big mess. And you won't see it, you won't feel it, you 15 won't sme]l it, but you all be dying from it.
16            So I would like to do -- well, they 9 as around 17 doing their pony show, their dog-and-pony show, and it is a 18 drama, everyone is sad after they leave and distraught 19 because it is so heartfelt and so painful to listen to their 20 stuff.
21            So I would like to give you a little comic relief, l
22 and I would like to give you a little cabaret.      And I would 23 like to encourage you all, the next time they come down to 24 sock it to them. So, if you don't mind, I would like to 25 give you my poem now.
ANN RILEY & ASCOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
54 1            They found some funny rocks out on the Colorado 2  Flats, and they thought they would make some money, so they I
3 hired some bureaucrats. Now, they say it is what we need to  '
4 keep us free from all our care, and we have atomic power 5  -- radiation everywhere.                                        i 6            Well, it is in the food, and it is in the air, and l
7 it is in the milk kids drink.      It is in the snow at 31wv6'                                                  1 8 Christmas and it is in the kitchen sink.      And down below the 9 continent there's tons of it on store, and all we have to do      '
10  is keep it safe for a million years or more.
11              Now,, it is the rage in Russia, in China and in 12  France, and every little dictator wants to get their power 13  chance. And they will breed it right along until there's 14  tons on it on store, and they will put it in their missiles 15  and they will have themselves a war.
16              Well, when we finally -- now, here's to all the 17  great men who have brought it right along, in all their war 18  and glory and in business, right or wrong.      And when we 19  finally meet them, in the mansion in the sky, we can thank 20  them very kindly for kissing our ass goodbye.
21              You can't see it, you can't feel it, you can't 22  stash it in the hall. You can't serve it up for dinner, it 23  won't answer when you call. You can't flush it down the 24  toilet, and, my friends, this is no lie, you will give it 25  life and money but you will never make it die.      Thank you.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) S42-0034
 
55 1-            [ Applause.]
2            MR. SHERIDAN:      Joe Besade. Where's Joe?  You have 3  a hard act to follow, Joe.
4            AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:      Poor Joe.
l 5            MR. .SHERIDAN:    Joe is not with us. We will' skip    )l 6  over Joe for a minute and we go to Joe Amarello.                    I 7            AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:      Joe Besade is here.
8            MR. SHERIDAN:      Hey, Joe, come on, you are on next. i 9            AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:      You can do it, Joe.
10            MR. BESADE:    My name is Joe Besade and I am from 11  Waterford, Connecticut, a member of the CRC, also, the 12  newest chapter of Fish Unlimited.
13            One of the questions I have is the letter from the 14  DEP that our First Selectman mentioned earlier in his l
15  putting in for -- documentation, a long kind of transcript.          I 16  What type of sampling was done?      Was it core bored and how 17  deep?
18            MR. SHERIDAN:      I will give you' a copy of t he 19  letter, Joe.
20            MR. BESADE:    Okay.
21            MR. SHERIDAN:      It is -- there were three types of.
22  samplings, and someone could correct me if I am wrong here, 23  there was a below ground, surface level and waste level.
24            MR. BESADE:    Okay. And the below ground would be 25  how deep, and how was it taken?      I have names of commercial ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
1 l
56 1 companies that I will take and --
2            MR. SHERIDAN:    I don't know how far down, but I 3 can give you a copy of the letter tomorrow, I would be happy
'4 to give it to you, 5            MR. BESADE:    That will be fine. Okay. My next 6 question is, after two years, I personally would like to 7 know who ' Jill be financially. responsible for the dismantling 8 and cleanup of Millstone site if NU Utilities and their 9 partners find it more profitable to go belly-up?    Does 10  anybody care to answer it at this time?
11            MR. MASNIK:    Mike Masnik from the NRC. We have 12  had a lot of discussions over this many years ago when 13  General Public. Utilities had an accident at Three Mile 14  Island. But, basically,-if Northeast Utilities should go 15  into bankruptcy, there would be a proceedings and it is 16  probably likely that the judge would honor the requirements 17  of public health and safety before other factors, so that 18  the money for decommissioning would be preserved.
19            The money in the decommissioning trust fund, we 20  are reasonably certain, would also be preserved for the 21' cleanup. Now, if there is insufficient funds in the 22  utility's assets, then the plant could be placed into 23  storage for-some period of time, or, ultimately, if there is 24- a' question of public health and safety, it would be the
: 25. responsibility of the federal government to step in and ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
l 57 1-  safeguard the public.
2              MR. BESADE:    By the federal government, do you      j 3  mean the NRC or the OIG who is going.to keep on the NRC?            I 4  .Right-now I don't have much faith in the NRC.        I have been 5L  to Washington, D.C. twice'and with.the -- watching local 6  politicians, our First Selectman and our Governor come over 7  to Millstone three.yearl ago and say that it was perfectly 8: . safe and none of us had anything to worry about it.      It-9  seems as though the whistle-blowers, who haven't got any 10  recognition, that they really deserre, I guess they were 11  quite right and, as you know now, they have spent over a 12  billion dollars on their errors, what should have been done 13  a long time ago.
    '14                The part that bothers me is when the NRC makes a 15  statement, don't you think the Northeast has suffered enough 16  financially?    I am not interested, and I am not happy to 17  hear'the NRC's worry about their financial background.        The 18  NRC's position is to look out for us small pecple and our 19'  well-being. Thank you.
20                [ Applause.]'
21              MR. SHERIDAN:    Thank you. The next person on the 22  list is Joe Amarello.
23'              MR. AMARELLO:    Good evening, my name is Joe 24  Amarello, I-am an instructor at Northeast Utilities in the
: 25  . Nuclear Training Department.      I have been there for ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202). 842-0034                            ,
l...
 
58 1 approximately two yearr, and I am speaking for myself.        I 2 just wanted to state thac safety is my first priority every 3 day at work, and specifically with respect to Millstone 4 Station Unit 1, any training that I provide in support of 5 Unit 1,  I will stress safety in all aspects of the 6 decommissioning effort.        That's it.
7            [ Applause.]
8            MR. SHERIDAN:      Thank you. We have completed the 9 list that we were provided.        Are there any other people who 10 have not signed up, that would like to speak?        This lady and 11 then, Mark, you will be after her.
12            MS. WINSLOW:      I guess I have a lot of questions.
13                      already been answered, but --
Some of them ha,vp W#& ELE /2 14            MR. SttRftTDMN:    Excuse me.
15            MS. WINSLOW:      My name is G(<21f 3 Winslow, and I am 16 a resident of W    e      .
17            MR . GHEMBAN :      Excuse me. And since we don't h6e 18 your name on the sign-up list, just so that we get the 19 transcript accurate, would you please spell your last name?
20            MS. WI SLOW:      Winslow, W-i-n-s-1-o-w.
21 l Udllf/Z MR. GHEMBAN:        Tha.k you.
22            MS. WINSLOW:      And the first name is Geralyn, 23 because t.lat is,pnusual name.
G-e-r-a-1-y-n.
WhhDC L&$.
24            MR. SHEMBRN:        Thank you.
25            MS    WINSLOW:    Okay. So the decision hasn't been ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036.
(202) 842-0034
 
p.
59 1  made about what they are going to do with Millstone 1 yet,
: 2. as far as the immediate future. It could be a while, it 3  could be right away. Is that the feeling I am getting here  i 4  tonight?  No decision'has been made yet?
5 h'MN/$
MR. MEMBbHR:    Our regulations allow the licensee 6  to either dismantle the plant immediately or put it into 7  'SAFSTOR for up to 60' years, in other words, complete'the 8  process within 60 years, or a combination of either. The 9  licensee has not indicated to us which of those two options 10    they will plan to do, and they are required by the 11    regulation to let us know within two years of 12    decommissioning.
:L3              MS. WINSLOW:    Okay. Because I had read in the 14    paper that they were going to let it sit for a while, and 15    that was the feeling I got before I came to this meeting 16    tonight, but now I hear that the choice hasn't been made 17    yet.
18-              What about the components of the plant itself, 19    what do they do with that?    When they take it apart, what do 20    they do with it?
21 NON/K MR.4EHHHMHtr Well, when they dismantle'the plant, 22    based on our experience at other facilities, they either try 23    to decontaminate the components or parts, or pipes. Or, if i
24    they are unable to decontaminate, in other words, remove the 25    radiation from the material, then they have to dispose of ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut. Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
i l
1 60 1  that material off-site, and that would be the material.that 2  would be sent down -- in the case of Northeast, it would be 3  sent down to Barnwell.
1 4            MS. WINSLOW:      Would that be considered high level 5  or low level waste, or is it a cocaination of each?                )
M/hSNI}<
6            MR    WHEELER <    Well, you have to analyze the CFhbiMmndog 7 _cO=hinaLica.
8            MS. WINSLOW:      Depending on the situation?
                      /1kSA /d
                            /
9            MR . +HHHHHHt :    It depends on the situation.
10            MS. WINSLOW:      Okay. Because I was curious about 11  ' hat.
      . And what about the high level waste, will it remain 12  on-site?
ffASN/K 13            MR. MHEELER:      Yes, until DOE has a permanent 14  repository. However, there are some other options.      The 15  licensee might choose to put it in an interim storage 16  facility. There is some discussion of a national interim 17  repository.
'18            MS, WINSLOW:      I know all about that. I am just 19  curious about, at Waterford, will it stay in the spent fuel 20  pool?
                    /1ASAf/A 21            MR. WHEBbER-      It depends what the licensee chooses 22  to do. They can keep it in the spent fuel pool for 40 23  years, or 30 years, or they could build dry storage and keep 24  it on-site in a dry storage facility, or they could ship it 25  to an interim facility if one was available.        And if DOE --
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036
                              .(202) 842-0034
                                                                          )
 
i 61        ;
                                                                      ~
i 1              MS. WINSLOW:      But that hasn't been decided.yet?            l MRSMsK 2              MR. h"! CELER :  No , it has not.
I 3              MS. WINSLOW:      Okay.
l MRSN/M                                                    I 4              MR. NP.EELE!' . And if DOE licensed the high level            l 5  repository, they would be able to ship it to that as well,                  i
{
6              MS. WINSLOW:      Okay. How much high level waste is 7  there associated with Millstone Unit 1,        in metric tons?
8  Because at one time I had heard some talk of measuring it in 9  metric tons. Does anybody have a number on that?      How much 10  high level radioactive waste is being stored in the Unit i 11  fu 1  col, does an body know? r h6 h'RS/VM l c06        'Q}q/,
J:3o',.<d)Pwd aff>sadaspcuckhkdAL W . . YY#gb Ab  ,
Mo/h 12          ,,,One hc' red one Millstones piled up on top of each 13  other. That's a lot of radioactive waste.        What are we 14  going to do with it all?
-15              Right now some of it goes to Barnwell, South i
16  Carolina, and it is leaking there.        They don't want it 17  there. People in Texas don't want it, because I've spoken 18  and met with some of them.        People in Maine decided they 19  didn't want it in any of their communities, so they're not                  l 20-  going to keep any of it there.        Nevada doesn't want it, 21  although the Government wants to put it there.        So nobody 22  wants it.
Y 23              -And I don't want to see Waterfor      waste 24  contaminate any of those communities, so I'm in favor of 25  keeping it in Waterford, which sounds.-- although strange h&f& ' ks ) Y dA h .                                M26 p kLyANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
62 1 thing, I live here, but I would rather see it remain where 2 it was' created. And it just boggles my mind to think of 100 3 nuclear plants being dismantled and put somewhere in storage 4 with no real assurance of safety there.      And I just -- when 5 I think of that, it drives me crazy, and then I think wel],
l 6 why are we still making it if we don't know what to do with      j i
7 it?  So my -- the only thing I could think of was maybe we 1
8 could just docide not to make it anymore, and then we could      i
                                                                    \
9 put our heads together for a future for our children and our 10 planet.
11            Thank you.
12            MR. SHERIDAN:    Mark, you're on. gt M 8p        ,
13            MR. HOLLOWAY:    Mark Holloway, Waterford, 14 Connecticut.
15            I didn't intend on speaking tonight or asking any 16 questions, but some things that were brought up really 17 concern me.
18            The gentleman mentioned a level as low as 19 reasonably ach'ievable, and this was in reference to the 20 25-rem limit. Does'this mean --
l 21            MR. BELLAMY:  The answer is yes, and it's 25 22 millirem, not 25 rem.                                            !
23 MR. HOLLOWAY:    Millirem. Okay.
24            MR. BELLAMY:    There's a factor of 1,000 difference 25 there.
l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.                      )
Court Reporters                            1 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
y 63 1            HMR.. HOLLOWAY:    Yes, you're right.
2            MR. BELLAMY:      25 millirem.
      '3            MR.'HOLLOWAY:      25 millirem. You're right.
4            MR. BELLAMY:    Thank you.
      'S              MR.'HOLLOWAY:      That's a big difference.              q 6            MR. BELLAMY:    Yes, it is.
7            MR..HOLLOWAY:      Now as low as reasonably 8  achievable, what is our numbers'for that?        Is there any sort 9  of a quantifier for that?
10              MR. BELLAMY:      I.would have to say there's no 11    quantifiable way to' define as low as reasonably achievable.
12    It's.taking the situation that you have and seeing if 13    there's any reasonable way to reduce the dose any further.
14    It's a principle that is used daily in hundreds of 15  -activities at this station and every other station in the 16    country.
17              MR. HOLLOWAY:      So are we saying that the: level
                                  */K .
                                      ~
18    could exceed the 25 - "'~'
j 19              MR. BELLAMY:    No.
1 20              MR. HOLLOWAY:
Millirem?
: 21.              MR. BELLAMY:    We are not. We are saying that you
                                        ~
    -22    first have to satisfy the 25 millirem per year.        Then we're-23_  saying.that maybe that's not good enough, and if there is a 24  way to reasonably. reduce that number, they would have to 25  . reduce that number further.
I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW,. Suite 1014
                            . Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
M G4 1  .
MR. HOLLOWAY:    Okay. So that  --
:2                  MR. BELLAMY: .And to get there --
3                  MR. HOLLOWAY:    That is your top -- that is your L4      . top level.
5'                MR. BELLAMY:    Correct.
6                .MR. HOLLOWAY:    Okay. Good. I'm glad to hear
    -7    that --
8                  MR. BELLAMY:    Correct.
9                  MR. HOLLOWAY:    There's sometimes a problem in what 10      I'look at as being a somewhat subjective measurement, 11-      qualities, and --
12                    MR. BELLAMY:    I would agree as low.as reasonably 13      Lachievable is a subjective criteria, yes.        But again the 25 14'      millirem per year is what you start with, and then you move 15      ' downward from that.
16'                  MR. HOLLOWAY:    Okay. That sounds a lot better 17      than a wide-open criteria'that is based upon someone's idea 18      .of what can be achieved.
19                    The area of responsibility in terms of high-level 20      waste,.there's been a lot of talk about who should have it, 21;      who's responsible for it.      Apparently the DOE is by. law 22      responsible for'it, but since'the DOE does not have an 23      . acceptable site, even though they're trying to get Yucca 24    LMountain approved, why don't we even consider -- and I'll-25      bet you guys _right now whatever you want to bet that ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025: Connecticut Avenue,.NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
65 1 Northeast Utilities does not go with the SAFSTOR method for 2 Millstone 1. That didn't happen at CY, and I don't think 3 it's going to happen here.
4            And, you know, I'm not really sure why, except 5 that several people have said there's a cost measure.      It is 6 more expensive. And it's also going to keep a facility 7 open. Another gentleman said well, it keeps people working.
8 But I guess that really doesn't matter.      What really matters  i 9 is get rid of it quick.
10            MR. MASNIK:    You know, there are some advantages 11 to immediate decontamination.      There are advantages of both, 12 obviously. I mean, SAFSTOR clearly you reduce the volume 13 and you reduce the exposure to the work force.      But there i
14 are some values to DECON.      You have an experienced work        )
15 force now that knows the plant.      In 50 years that won't be 16 the case.A The Agency has put a lot of stock into that.
17            Another thing that we're concerned about is -- and 18 we have to be realistic here -- once the facility is no 19 longer generating money, there is not a lot of incentive for 20 the licensee to. spend a lot of money on the facility.      And 21 one of the things we're concerned about in storing these 22 facilities for quite a few years is degradation of the 23 barriers to the environment. ~You know, we're very sensitive 24 to that. So those two things I think are significant in our 25 mind as far as the DECON is concerned.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
66 1          Now in 1988 the Commission did.an environmental 2 impact' statement, what we call a generic environmental        ,
3 impact statement, where we looked at a number of options, 4 and the two that were clearly acceptable for plants were the.
5 DECON and the SAFSTOR options. And we decided that either    i 6 of those or a combination of those were acceptable. It was 7 up to the licensee to make the decision. And we've got.
8 experience in both, and there are pros and cons for both.
9          MR. HOLLOWAY:    But there have been billions of 10 dollars that have been set aside for high-level waste 11 storage, and some of that money has already been spent on 12 the Yucca Mountain facility. So what would be the 13 problem -- I realize the utility can't bear the whole burden 14 of SAFSTOR throughout the country at particular plants --
15 what would be the big problem in using those moneys for that 16 method considering it is as people have expressed probably 17 the safest method that can be utilized?
18          MR. MASNIK:    That's a decision that's way above 19 me. I understand your point.
20          MR. HOLLOWAY:    I'm talking about responsibility, 21 though.
22          MR. MASNIK:    Would they be able to give that money 23 back to the utilities to build an onsite repository?
24          MR. HOLLOWAY:    The utility might not even have 25 that site anymore. It might become a U.S.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
l
                                                                        )
I 67 1  Government-sanctioned high-level waste site with SAFSTOR 2  capability. I mean, I guess I don't understand why that we    l 1
3  have funds for this purpose that are not being utilized for
    ~4  this purpose.                                                    t 5            MR. MASNIK:    Well, the Department of Energy is 1
6  having a difficult time licensing Yucca Mountain, and 7 -that's --                                                          .
8            MR. HOLLOWAY:    Well, I'm not even talking about 9  Yu    Mountain. We have 105 plants in the U.S. that could 10  be high-level waste facilities with the proper use of 11  manpower, responsibility,.and funds.
12              MR. 8eAl%
MACNIm. I don't think that option is out the  1 l
13  window. I can tell you that Maine Yankee is seriously 14  pursuing what's called'an independent spent-fuel storage 15'  facility onsite for specifically that purpose. They have an 16  advisory committee that I attend their meetings                  j 17  approximately. monthly to find out what's going on, and that 18  is right.on the top of their consideration priority list, 19  and Maine-Yankee will foot the entire bill for that 20' -facility.                                                        ,
1 21              MR. HOLLOWAY:    Would this be something that the 22  NRC would encourage?                                              l 23              MR. BELLAMY:    Encourage is a hard term for us to
:24  use. .We will encourage the licensees -- we will encourage 25  the licensees to do whatever is necessary to protect public      l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036
                              -(202)-842-0034
 
i 68 1  health and safety. If they can convince us that an            ,
2  independent-spent-fuel storage facility is the best way to 3  protect public health and safety, we would support that.
4            I don't like the word " encourage," and I won't use 5  the word " encourage."  If a licensee comes in and says we 6  think that the best way to protect public health and safety 7  is to completely decontaminate, decommission, and dismantle 8  this facility today and they can do~it in a manner that 9  protects public health and safety, we would support.that 10  decision.
11            MR. HOLLOWAY:    So you're basing it on you have --
12  you're saying to the utility you have these two options, 13  demonstrate to us which option that can be used most 14  effectively in this case. You don't have a preferred 15, method.
16            MR. BELLAMY:    Correct. That's correct.
17'          MR. HOLLOWAY:    There's nothing that'you say this 18  is the way we want to go on this.
19            MR. BELLAMY:    That's correct.
20            MR. HOLLOWAY:    Okay.
21-          MR. BELLAMY:    I also -- you know, there have been 22  a lot of comments and discussions tonight on SAFSTOR versus 23  DECON. .There are also significant differences in the 24  benefits'as to whether there are additional operating 25- facilities and reactors at that site. So Haddam Neck is an ANN RILEY &~ ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025' Connecticut Avenue, NW,.. Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036-(202) 842-0034 4
 
69 1 entirely different situation.        If Haddam Neck decided that 2 they wanted to go to a SAFSTOR situation, we would have to 3 take a very hard look at how they're going to secure that 4 facility over the next X years until they d'ecide that 5 SAFSTOR is not appropriate.      Whereas here at the Millstone 6 Point you will have a continued very substantial security 7 force, guard force, health physics department, and those 8 sort of ancillary activities to support the work.        So you 9 have to look at each situation differently, and there's a 10 significant difference in the benefits and advantages of 11 DECON versus SAFSTOR for the different types of reactors.
12            MR. HOLLOWAY:    Because you have operating reactors 13 and you'll be able to maintain an operating plant license 14 within the boundaries of that facility.
15            MR. BELLAMY:    I would characterize it more as you 16 have -- you have adequately trained staff there to provide 17 the support facilities for the reactor that might go into 18 SAFSTOR such as the situation at Indian Point 1, TMI-2, and 19 Peach Bottom 1.
20            MR. HOLLOWAY:    Thank you.
21            MR. SHERIDAN:    Paul and then -- well, Evan, go 22 ahead, and then Paul.
23 M00s.A. Aco Y MR. WO9heOPP:
4)bf I'm Evan 'fecl;ctt . I cochair the 24 Nuclear Energy Advisory Council.        I'm speaking for myself, 25 just so you know that.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 102*- Ponnecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034                                i
 
70 1                And'I just want to emphasize a couple of things 2    that I heard.      I had not planned on speaking. I think it 3    was Rosemary here brought up the item about a hearing after 4    decommissioning is done is not a hearing.        And they' talked 5    about'taking legal action.        I think it would be a lot easier 6    if the NRC took a look at that and schedaled hearings ht the 7    proper time.
8                  [ Applause.]
9                AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:      Yes. Thank you.
10                  MR. WOObEO995      I think also that I should say that 11    I've been in the nuclear field since 1953, and when someone 12    says they have extensive experience in decommissioning, I
  .13    don't.think that's true.        We're all learning an awful lot.
14    One of the concerns I have is that the BWR is a direct-cycle 15    unit, and it gives off more radiation than the systems in a 16    pressurized water reactor.        And I wonder if NRC has looked 17    atL the differences between BWR and PWR and made sona "18-    , decisions of what actions they might take.
19                  MR. MASNIK:      We did a series -- Mike Masnik
  -2 0 '  again -- we did a series of studies back in the eighties, 21    and some of those studies are continued -- actually I
22    continued into the nineties -- where we locked at e                  '
23    reference BWR and a reference PWR, and the study actually 24    went_through-the dismantlement, it looked at discrete work            l
    .                                                                            I 25    packages, it looked at discrete components, and it made some          ]
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014                    l Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 p
 
71 1 predictions about what kind of exposure the work force would 2 get, what kind of costs would be incurred.
3          I'm happy to say that our experience to date, at 4 least at the PWR facilities, has been that the rates of 5 exposure are significantly lower than what we predicted.      So 6 it seems like the industry is doing a better job at taking 7 the plants apart than we had predicted.
8
: 6) &
MR. wOOLCCTT:    Yes, I think that was my point. I 9 think as we get experience, there are different ways we can 10 clean these things up so it's more usable from the              l l
11 standpoint of where you want to put it and that type of          !
12 thing.
13          And the other one, I know Rosemary won't like 14 this, but she has to listen to me every once in a while          l 1
15 anyway, and I hope and pray that the DOE and all the suits      I 16 will cause the DOE to do something to make a centralized 17 interim storage facility so we have one place to take care 18 of the high-level nuclear waste.      I recognize the problem of 19 low-level, but high-level has got to go in one spot.      And I  i 20 would say that whoever talked to the people in Nevada didn't 21 talk to the same people I talked to in Nevada, because the 22 people in Nevada say they want it.      They'd like to have it.
23          Thank you.
24            MR. SHERIDAN:    Paul?
25          MR. BLANCH:    My name is Paul Blanch. I'm from ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court-Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
: a.                                      __.
 
l 72 1  West Hartford, Connecticut. I'm a consultant to Northeast 2  Utilities, but I'm here speaking for myself.
About a year ago I attended a meeting at Yankee        I 3
4  Rowe, and it was a meeting similar to this. And I wasn't 5  going to speak tonight, but a point was made, and it's 6  bothersome to me. I reviewed the transcript of that Yankee    !
l 7  Rowe meeting a few months ago, and the Nuclear Regulatory 8  Commission at that time promised me an answer in writing to 9  my questions, and here we are a little over a year later, 10  and I still haven't gotten any response from the NRC.
11            But the basic question was that Yankee Rowe stated 12  that their site, returning it to greenfield, was going to be    ,
l 13  for unrestricted use, and I ran the numbers, and they were 14  going to sa.y -- they said that no area three feet above the 15  ground woult be more than 10 microrad per hour,.which if you 16  work that out to 8,760 hours a year,'that turns out to be 87 17  millirem per year. And I asked how that equated to 25 18  millirem a' year, which was their criteria. What I've 19  heard -- and by the way, that was for unrestricted, which is 20  defined as living there 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, and      j 21  potential,1y camping out and sleeping on the ground.
22            I think what I heard tonight by one lady was that 23  you've now changed the definition of unrestricted access to 24' be only eight hours a day?    Is that what I heard?
25            AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:    Yes, you heard that.
I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
73 1              MR. MASNIK:      I don't-believe we said eight hours a 2                                                C?)
day.                                        $
3              AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:      The greenfield.you did.
A 4              MR. SHERIDAN:      Could you give these folks a chance 5  to respond, please?
: 6.            AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:      Double-talk, buddy.
                                                                            ]
h/ kin //<                                        l 7              MR.H&ebbAMY:      The estimate is based on the average '
8  dose to a member of the critical group, and there are 9  certain assumptions made on the amount of time that this 10  individual spends on the site.        Nobody, or very few people, 11- spend their entire 365 days a year on the ground.        Now there i
12  .are people, you know, you move, you leave the location, and
: 13. the calculation is done assuming that.the individual instead 14  of taking the worst-case condition takes an average 15  condition for the individual.
?
16              MR. BLANCH:      Well, that is completely contrary to 17  what we were told.        And if you look at the transcript at the 18  Yankee Rowe meeting, you'll clearly see it was based on 19  8,760 hours a year.
20-            AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:      He was there.
21              MR. BLANCH:      And I would also like to formally 22  request that you review that transcript, and I would like a 23  response in writing from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 24  to that.
25              MR. MASNIK:      Paul, we will give you --
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
l 74 1            MR. BLANCH:    Because I think it's important.
2  We''re talking -- and it doesn't matter to me, 15 millirem 3' doesn't hurt in my mind, 25, you know, I'm not worried about 4  that. But when you go from 25 to 87 and then it's just by 5  changing a little bit of words to the average individual, 6  that's bothersome. And sometimes people could actually camp 7- out on these sites. Who knows how they're going to be used.
8  But if it's unrestricted, it's got to be for the 8,760 9  hours, whatever it is.
10            The second question or statement I'd like to make 11- is there's a lot of confusion as to what regulations apply
.12  during decommissioning. We' re still applying the rules ' of 13  Part 50, which is for an operating nuclear powerplant.      We 14  know that this is no longer an operating nuclear powerplant.
15  And I've actually talked to some of the Commis.'ioners and 16  the EDO about this particular topic.      And we need -- we, the 17  industry, and the NRC needs more clarification as to what 18  rules apply during the decommissioning.
19            For instance, there are a lot of areas of Part 50 20  that do apply and do not apply. There arc areas of various 21  appendices to Part 50 like Appendix A.      What applies as far 22  as Appendix A in the general design criteria?      Appendix B, 23  quality assurance requirements. What quality assurance 24  requirements?  And I'm not saying you need to increase when 25  we're decreasing, it's just that they need to be defined.
ANN RILEY &-ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014
                      ' Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
75 1              Utilities need to know what they're doing.        Maine 2  Yankee is doing it differently than Connecticut Yankee.          I 3 . understand Maine Yankee essentially is doing it without an 4  Appendix B program.        I'm not saying whether that's right or 5  wrong. It's just got to be defined so that the utilities 6  and the public know what is going on.          And I think that has 7  to be done very quickly, before the Millstone 8  decommissioning starts, so that everyone knows what rules 9  ~are being played by.        I'm not asking you to respond to that, 10  but it's just a statement right now.
11              Thank you.
12                (Applause.]
13              MR. MASNIK:      Paul, we will provide you with a 14  written response to your question.
15              MR. BLANCH:                                                )
16              MR. SHERIDAN:
0%ddThankw ary?
you.b 0-f- )        '
17              MS. KUHN:      Thank you for being here. I just have
'18  a couple of quick questions, or comments too.
19              I would suggest that -- oh, I'm scrry, Mary Kuhn, 20  K-u-h-n,    RC from Waterford -- Quaker Hill, actually.
21              In your presentations I understood also that or as 22  low as reasonably achievable, what I understood you to say 23  was 25 millirems a year or as low as reasonably achievable, 24  which sounded like a big loophole to me.          And I think that 25  if you have any printed material, it would be-well to
      @ He.MsMIK! % .
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
76 1 clarify that, because it was very confusing.
2                  MR. BELLAMY:    I'm sorry, could you state -- could 3 you tell me again what the confusion is?
4                  MS. KUHN:  Well, you say 25 millirems a year or as 5 low as reasonably achievable.
6                  MR. BELLAMY:    I beg your pardon. If'I said or, I i
7 misspoke -- it's "and."
l  8                  MS. KUHN:  Um-hum.
1 l
9                  MR. BELLAMY:    It's 25 millirem per year and as low 10 as reasonably achievable.            It is not an "or" statement, it 11 is an "and" statement.            The licensee bust satisfy both 12 criteria independently.
13                  MS. KUHN:  Um-hum.
14                  MR. BELLAMY:    So if I stated "or," I misspoke and
  '15 I misled you.          But I meant to say "and."
16                  MS. KUHN:  Um-hum.
17                  MR. BELLAMY:    They have to satisfy both.
18                  MS. KUHN:  Or you could say or as low as 19 reasonably achievable below --
20                  MR. BELLAMY:    Great. Thank you.
21                  MS. KUHN:    25 millirems a year.
l 22                  MR. BELLAMY:    Great.                                j 23      ,
MS. KUHN:  Yes. The spent fuel pool comes under 24 the DOE?          Is that correct?    Will that be still where it is 25 now?
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
77 l'                                    MR. BELLAMY:    The answer is no. The spent fuel 2-  pool remains-un' der NRC regulatory jurisdiction here at the 3    site.
4                                    MS. KUHN:    Um-hum, i
K 5                                    MR. BELLAMY:    The Department of Energy is required 6    by law to generate and have a spent-fuel repository.
7                                    MS. KUHN:    Oh, I see.
8                                    MR. BELLAMY:    Offsite, and the facility that 9    you've heard mentioned is. Yucca Mountain.
10                                    MS. KUHN:    Um-hum. Do you have any concerns about 11    this spent-fuel pool?                          Well, it's above ground now. Is t"tt 12    correct?
13                                    MR. BELLAMY:    The answer is yes, it's above 14    ground.            We inspected it today, this afternoon.                We walked 15    away with no concerns that said I have to do anything about 16    it or any of the NRC staff has to do anything about it 17    today. We took a look to ensure that there was a 18    leak-detection system.                          So it's a difficult question to ask, 19    do you have any concerns.                            We have a concern about a 20    leak-collection system to make sure that if there is a leak 21    it can be detected.                          But it's not a significant concern.
I 22 l                                MS. KUHN:      I feel a little uneasy with that 23    spent-fuel pool myself because I understand that the 24    containment of the reactor was so strong that it could take 25    an airplane c[ ashing into it.                          And then I always thought ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
78 1  that well, what if it didn't crash into the reactor, what if h>ould 2  it crashed into the spent-fuel pool, what might happen to 3  that?  And I once asked an NRC person, and they said well, 4- that would be the worst possible thing, because you would 5  lose your coolant.                            And I take it you would lose your
;                            6  coolant reasonably quickly, too, or at least you could.                              So l
7  I have always felt a little uneasy with that there.
8              MR. MASNIK:                          The spent-fuel pool is in the          !
I i                            9  containment at Millstone 1.                                                              '
l 10              MS. KUHN:                          Um-hum.
11              MR. MASNIK:                          Okay?  So it's inside that structure.
12              MS. KUHN:                          The same containment that the reactor's  j 13  in?
l 14              AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT:                          Don't lie to her. It's not 15, inside. It's got a regular roof over the top of it just 16  like we've got here.                              It's not in containment.
17              MR. BELLAMY:                          It's inside the reactor building.
18  It is not inside the same structure that the -- the 1
19  containment vessel and the reactor have a separate structure 20  inside the reactor building.                              The spent-fuel pool is in the 21  reactor building.                            That's a correct clarification.
22              MS. KUHN:                          Thank you. I also understood from an 23  NRC person that the billions of dollars that were set aside 24  for the permanent storage are no longer available, that they 25  had been -- I think one gentleman said it was put to use to ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1925 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 c_________________________                      _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _                              __
 
f.
I 79 1  decrease the budget deficit or something like that.      .That's 2  just my understanding.                                            I
    -3              MR. SHERIDAN:    That's correct.
4              MS. KUHN:    That is correct. The other point that j    5  I would like to make hopefully that the NU is a little 6  bit -- has their priorities a little bit more in order than 7 .you think they do, because I notice that you said that if l
l    8  the high-level radioactive waste is kept on' site, then the 9  company doesn't -- but the plant'is closed, decommissioned, l
10  it doesn't have a lot of incentive for the company to spend 11  money. And I would like to think that safety is the first 12  incentive of this company, but I guess the NRC doesn't 13  necessarily think so.      I just wanted to make that comment. i 14              Thank you very much.
15              [ Applause.]
16              MR. SHERIDAN:      Are we all set with first-time 17  speakers?
18              MR. MANGIAGLI:      I have a couple of comments I'd 19  like to make. You mentioned one of the very good reasons 20  for the rapid dismantlement of the reactors, the experienced 21  work force that's on site that is familiar with the reactor, 22  so therefore they're best suited to take it apart.      But yet 23  Siemens has done the chemical decontamination at Connecticut 24  Yankee,'and Connecticut Yankee is taking bids from I
25  contractors to rip the steam generators out, to rip the ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washia.gton, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
i 80 1  vessel out, the pressurizer, to do all this work.      They're 2  looking to take the lowest bid they can get.      Maine Yankee 3  has done the same thing.      Maine Yankee has used contractors.
4- So this thing about th'e experienced work force, what happens 5  to the experienced work force, totally shafted for 6  lower-bidding contractors.
7            So, you know, this issue of the experienced work 8  force being on site is pretty weak when they're being laid 9  off.
10            MR. MASNIK:    What we find at most plants is that 11  there's a significant reduction in the number of full-time 12  personnel, that it gets down to about 150 to 200 13  individuals, and these are the people that the licensee 14  maintains on site during the DECON activity.      Now it is true 15  that they go out and contract f      v rious evolutions and 16  operations, for example, full-6& edged DECON. Or if they're 17  removing major components, they go out and they hire a heavy 18  lift operator. But that work is supervised and overseen by 19  the utility personnel.
20            MR. .MANGIAGLI:    Something I'd like to say on the 21  Yucca Mountain issue, the high-level waste issue, Mr.
22  Sheridan, you've worked very hard to see.that the interim 23  storage bill gets passed, the mobile Chernobyl bill.      And 24  just to remind everybody that's thinking that Yucca Mountain      I 25- is like this wonderful thing that's going to save us all i
1 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
1 I:                                                                    '81
: j.  '1-  from.our high-level waste, it'll only hold a-third of the 2  high-level' waste that we will be generating, that we need to-3  .be building'two more Yucca Mountains like right now, because 4  the: volume is not there.
5              One of the site criteria boundaries for Yucca l
l 6  Mountain was that-there was to be zero water infiltration 7  .for 1,000 years. They found radioactive chlorine in Yucca 8  Mountain that could have only come from the bomb tests, i    9  'They found it down in their trenches where they're digging.
10    This is.50 years' water' travel down to Yucca Mountain. They 11    found the. plate movement underneath Yucca Mountain to be ten l
12    times greater than they thought. Water infiltration, they i
l  13    found that there's hairline fractures, subterraneal hairline 14    fractures from all the under;ccound bomb testing. That whole 15    area is just' filled with hairline fractures.    , Yucca Mountain 16    is falling on its face, and everybody knows it. Everybody 17    knows it.
18-              To start. transporting all of our high-level waste 19    to Yucca' Mountain will take 30 years at a shipment a day.
20-  The Department of' Energy estimates 15 accidents a year at 21'    that kind of volume of traffic. The casks are not even 22    built yet. We will be shoving waste into Yucca Mountain 23    thatLwill be irretrievable, and it will have to be 24    safeguarded for 240,000 years. This is a geological time
:25    frame. This isn't decades or centuries. We could have a l
l l
l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.                        l Court Reporters                              !
1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036                          l (202) 842-0034                            ,
1
 
1 82 1  damn ice age by then.      There's no telling what's going to 2  happen.
3              And you're going to shove this waste into that 4  mountain where it's irretrievable so 30 years from now we 5  -have a better. solution, 50 years,.1,000 years from now we          l 6  could have a better solution, and that waste will be 7  irretrievable. This is a very irresponsible, short-sighted, 8  illusion that the utility is creating and that the NRC is 9  backing. And it's not for the people, it's for the 10  liability of this very deadly, lethal, long-lived 11  radioactive waste. And you better start thinking about the 12  people, because we're getting fed up with getting the short 13  end of this "too cheap to meter" friendly atom.        It's full 14'  of lies. .The whole industry is based on lies.
15              [ Applause.)
16              MR. SHEP.IDAN:    Next, Rosemary.
17              MS. BASSILAKIS:      Rosemary Bassilakis up again.
18              First of all, I just wanted to comment on the 19  overhead that the NRC presented.        You said that there were 20  three nuclear reactors that completed decommissioning 21  already. Shoreham, which operated for how m;ny hours, Mr.
'22  Masnik?    About 48 hours?
23 Gcllw MR. +EGN4K41 I don't know how many hours it
'24  operated, but it did not operate above 5 percent rated 25  power.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014
                        . Washington, *  .C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
-s 83 1            MS.'BASSILAKIS:      Right. So it's not too 4
2 incredibly radioactive of a challenge.        Fort St. Vrain, what 3 kind of nuclear reactor was that?
4            MR. MASNIK:    High-temperature gas reactor.
5            MS. BASSILAKIS:      Right. Is it true it used helium 6 to cool the fuel rods?
7            MR. KASNIK:    The answer is yes.
8            MS. BASSILAKIS:      Because it's my understanding 9 that helium doesn't become radioactive, which is actually a 10 very nice feature, in that you'll have less contaminated 11 piping.
12            You also mentioned another nuclear reactor, 13 Pathfinder?    I've never heard of it. Can you tell me where 14 and how big that reactor is?
15            MR. MASNIK:      It was a small demonstration reactor 16 built a number of years ago.
17            MS    bhSSILAKIS:    Okay. So those are the three 18 reactors that we've completely decommissioned.        That's not a 19 huge track record, and we are definitely still in the 20 experimental stage.
21            Now Jen Gutshall had raised the issue of how many 22 boiling water' reactors have been decommissioned.        It's my 23 understanding that they're most in SAFSTOR, and that the Big
                    /5 24 Rock Point, Ae'the first boiling water reactor right now awwk 25 thef' r- 304 3    uv  decommissioning. Is that true?
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
84 1                -MR. MASNIK:    Big Rock' Point is,in active            i 2    dismantlement.                                                      j 3  -
MS. BASSILAKIS:    Right. That's the first one.
4'  'And so if Millstone Unit 1 undergoes decommissioning, it 5    would be~the second boiling water reactor to undergo rapid 6    dismantlement.
7                MR. MASNIK:    If they choose DECON, it would be the 8    second.
9                MS. BASSILAKIS:    Okay. Well, I mean if they do 10_  choose rapid-dismantlement, I'll look over ttJs side of the 11    table, because this is the licensee's side 04 the table.        Is 12    that true?        7 13              t'Mk.MASNIK      Correct.
14                MS. BASSILAKIS:    Well, one of the concerns we 15  .have -- of course we believe in SAFSTOR anyway.        Sal 16    Mangiagli pointed that out pretty clearly, that that's the 17    most reasonable stance to take.        But if you were to undergo 18    DECON, you would be just the second boiling water reactor to 19    undergo DECON, but also, ica would have to juggle -- you 20    uould have to. juggle dismantling. Unit 1,    trying to restart 21    Unit 2, and keeping Unit 3 up to high enough standards to 22    keep operating.      I would say that's far more than you can 23    handle at this point in time, and that you really should go 24    for SAFSTOR. It's in everybody's best interest, not just R25    ours, but yours as well.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036
                              -(202) 842-0034 i
 
l 85 1          As far as spent fuel management goes, I think 2 everybody needs to know that we have no say in how the spent 3 fuel is managed. We as community members have no say 4 whether or not it stays in the pool, whether or not it goes 5 in dry casks, anything. And we know this from experience, 6 because CAN -- Citizens Awareness Network -- wanted to be 7 involved with the spent-fuel management. We had questions, 8 concerns that we wanted to raise. And when we first went to 9 a prehearing with the NRC, we were told that during the        )
i 10 license termination plan hearing, you will be able to          )
l 11 address that issue. It's premature at this point in time. l 12          Well, on January 26 of this year we went before 13 the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, and we were told that 14 we cannot discuss fuel management at all, that that utility 15 can put those -- the fuel rods in dry casks, they can take 16 out the fuel pool, they can do whatever the heck they          l l
17 wanted, and we don't have a say. And we consider this a 18 meltdown in democracy. Again, this is wrong. These are 19 issues that vitally affect us and our communities, and we 20 need to have a voice. We shouldn't need to hire lawyers to 21 get a voice, we should have a voice.
22            I guess I'll just -- oh, two more things. One is, 23 you know, Jen Gutshall raised the issue of who the standard 24 was, whether or not it was 150 some odd men or whether the 25 standard was a child. And the NRC likes to look at it as ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NN, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
l                                                                86 1-  far as well, you know, we really don't need to protect the 2    worst-case scenario, and we don't believe this is a 3    worst-case scenario. Having a child on site 24 hours'a day, 4    365 days a year, is reasonable. Kids don't go to school 5    until they're five. Before then, they're home with their 6    mom for the most part. And we want them to be' protected.
7    And this is one of the reasons why CAN is trying to get a 8    hearing on the license-termination plan. We believe NRC 9    needs to take another hard look at their regulation.      It is 10    the children we need to protect.
11              And this is important, because unrestricted use        l 12    means unrestricted use. It means a family can build their 13    home there and raise their family there. Someone can open 14    up a day-care on Millstone Point. It sounds kind of absurd, 15    but it will happen. It will happen. It might not be for 60 16    years or 70 years or 80 years, but it will happen. And what 17    we -- the things we decide today will impact future 18    generations. And this is so incredibly important. We need 19    to be as protected as possible so we can be assured that 20    future generations will be safe.
21              And lastly, as far as a, you know, the issue of 22    the fuel pool was raised at Millstone Unit 1,  and I re' called 23    that the fuel rods in that fuel pool, there's a bunch of 24    them that aren't seated properly. And it keeps getting 25    pushed off and pushed off into the future as far as when ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036.
(202) 842-0034
__________A
 
87 1 those unseated fuel rods are going to be addressed, and I'm 2 just wondering, are they going to be addressed in the PSDAR, 3 are they going to be addressed in future NRC inspections?
4 When are we going to address this very fact that the fuel 5 rods aren't seated where they're supposed to be seated?      And 6 maybe -- I don't know, maybe you guys can't answer that,          ,
7 because it's not really your jurisdiction.
8            MR. BELLAMY-    Well, I can't answer it, but I'd 9 like to get a little more details of exactly what you mean 10 by unseated, and check with my staff and find out exactly 11 what the situation is.
12            MS. BASSILAKIS:    Ron, please do, because they have 13 a whole bunch of unseated fuel rods.      They don't know why.
14 They don't know -- because there's tools hanging down there.
15            MR. REYNOLQy:    Unseated means that the rack slot 16 that they're designed to be in in the spent-fuel pool 17 they're not  --
18            MS, BASSILAKIS:    Right.
19                      M MR. ISYNOLO.:    Geometrically where they're 20 supposed to be. That's your definition of " unseated"?
21            MS. BASSILAKIS:    Yes.
22            MR. REYNOLDo:    I'll check it out.
23            MS. BASSILAKIS:    Good.
24            MR. SHERIDAN:    Thank you.
25            Anyone else who would like to speak?
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014                    .
Washington, D.C. 20036                          l (202) 842-0034                              1 3
 
l 88 1              Paul.
(
2              MR. BLANCH:    Tony, I just want to read something 3  from the transcript here.
4                I'm Paul Blanch again. And just related to our 5    followup from my previous statement, Rosemary gave me a copy 6  of the transcript from the meeting of Yankee Rowe.      And this 7    is a statement, the criteria that was being used.at Yankee 8    Rowe. And they were committing to 15 millirem a year, and 9    I'm just going to read a couple of lines here from the 10    transcript.
11              When people establish a home on site, they plant a 12    garden and they eat vegetables that are grown in a garden, 13    and we also assume that they put a well on site and drink 14    the ground water that's on site. And when you add all the 15 N
radiation from the exposure from the ground, from any 16    exposure associated with eating the vegetables or drinking 17    the water, the total dose for that must be less than 15 18    millirem per year. That doesn't sound like unrestricted --
19    that is unrectricted access, and I would hope that -- now 20    that is the criteria you're applying, and not eight hours a 21    day. It sounds like someone has made a major, major policy 22    change to increase the allowable exposure from 25 to 87 23    millirem per year.
24              Thank you 25              MR. SHERIDAN:    I'd like to thank all of you. This ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
89 1    is the first of what I hope to be several meetings that we 2-  will have to discuss this matter. hit's very, very 3    important. I really appreciate the comments that everyone l  4    has made. There are two or three items that I just want to      j 5    remind NRC about as we leave.        One is there was a question 6E  asked that I wasn't clear on the answer, and that is if 7    there was an answer, that is, how much waste is left in the 8    Unit 1 pool.      I think we need an answer to that.
9                The second, there was some question about a n1n 10    request -- written request on the clarification of the 20 -M-11    or lower issue.      That came up several times, and I think it 12    would be appropriate if we could put that in writing so that 13    everybody has a clear understanding of that.
14                And the third matter is a letter for the record          !
15    from Dr. Wiles on the radiation that you requested.
16                Again, thank you very much, and I hope we can l 17    continue this rapport and help this process along.        We all l 18    want to do what's right here.
l 19                MR. WHEELER:    As was mentioned at the beginning, l
20    the NRC staff will stick around after the meeting to make 21    ourselves available to continue further discussions with 22    anyone who chooses to do so.
Thank you.
23                [Whereupon, at 9:10 p.m., the meeting was i
24    concluded.]
25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034
 
1 REPORTER'S CERTZFICATE                    1 This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 1
the matter of:
NAME OF PROCEEDING:        MILLSTONE UNIT 1,                    I DECOMMISSIONING PUBLIC MEETING      i i
i l
i CASE NUMBER:                                                  ;
l PLACE.OF PROCEEDING:        Waterford, CT were held as herein appears, and that this is.the original l
transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me and thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the direction of the court reporting company, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings.
                                  \v    -
W /)        -
Vic Rasmussen Official Reporter Ann Riley & Associates, Ltd. l
 
{,      i United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission PUBLIC MEETING NRC DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAM                              .
February 9,1999 Waterford Town Hall Waterford, Connecticut Louis L. Wheeler
                        ''onior Project Manager Non-Power Reactw and Decommissioning Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
 
1
  'O
  ,    \    United States
  \    )    Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRC STAFF PRESENT Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1
Dr. Seymour H. Weiss, Project Director          i Dr. Michael T. Masnik, Section Chief Mr. Phillip M.. Ray, Project Manager Ms. Etoy Hylton, Licensing Assistant            3 Ms. Patricia Milligan, Health Physicist Mr. William C. Huffman, Project Manager Mr. Stephen Dembek, Project Manager Mr. Sam Nalluswami, Project Manager Region I Dr. Ronald R. Bellamy, Branch Chief Mr. Paul C. Cataldo, Millstone Resident Inspector Mr. Neil A. Sheehan, Public Affairs Office        j Office of the General Council i
Ms. Ann P. Hodgdon, Senior Attorney              l Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguarils Mr. James C. Shepherd, Project Manager            l 2
 
("%  United States Q  ) Nuclear Regulatory Commission OUTLINE                    ;
I O What is/is not Decommissioning 9 NRC Focus 9 Decommissioning Alternatives G Decommissioning Process Requirements 1
    'O Post-Shutdown Activities Report i
9 Additional Restrictions                    !
I l
9 Financial Considerations 9 The License Termination Plan l
i 9 National Perspective                      j 9 NRC Staff Points of Contact 9 NRC Inspection Program for Decommissioning Power Plants 3
 
,fl's  United States i
: s. Nuclear Regulatory Commission                              _
WHAT IS DECOMMISSIONING?                                            !
I Decommissioning is defined as-I The removal of a facility safely from service and the reduction of residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property and termination of the license.
WHAT IS NOT DECOMMISSIONING?
Decommissioning does not include:
9 Non-radiological cleanup / demolition e Site restoration activities e Spent fuel management 1
I 4
 
  ~~
l    United States                                  i Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRC FOCUS The NRC focus is on the removal of radiological hazards                                        l l
9 Removal of the faility from service l
9 Reduction of radioactive materials to a level that allows site release                  I S Detailed final radiological survey 9 License termination 5
 
j'''~\  United States Q    )  Nuclear Regulatory Commission                  j ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVES                    l i
l G DECON -- Decontaminate and dismantle j l
G SAFSTOR - Long term storage followed by decontamination and dismantlement G Combination of both I
l i
6 1
 
I
(('\      United States l
                                                    \ .....
Nuclear Regulatory Commission I
                                                                                                            )
INITIAL STEPS IN THE PROCESS 9 Licensee Certifications                    l 99 Operations permanently ceased 1
99 Fuel removed from the reactor vessel  l 1
99 Certifications are irreversible      1 9 Operating license no longer authorizes fuel loading 9 Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report 9 Site-specific Cost Estimate 1
7
 
j'^\  United States
  )  Nuclear Regulatory Commission POST-SHUTDOWN DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES REPORT (PSDAR)
The PSDAR is required to provide:              {
9 A description of planned decommissioning activities 9 A schedule for accomplishment of planned activities 9 An estimate of expected costs 9 Reasons for concluding that environmental impacts are bounded by previously issued environmental impact statements The NRC staff will hold a public meeting in the ,
vicinity of the site.                          {
The PSDAR is a summary description.
I 8
 
1 Y' ~~'  United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1
FINA      ,IAL CONSTRAINTS 9      Limit of 3% of the trust fund for decommissioning planning 9      Limit of 20% prior-to receiving the site-specific cost estimate, provided the PSDAR has been issued 9      Full access not permitted until site-specific cost estimate is issued 9      NRC constraints do not usurp state regulatory constraints b
1 9
 
f''%  united states Q  ) Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1
ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS The licensee is prohibited from performing any i
decommissioning activity that:
9 Forecloses the release of the site for possible unrestricted use; or 9 Results in significant environmentalimpacts not previously considered; or 9 Results in there no longer being reasonable assurance that adequate funds will be available.
l l
                              ~                          >
10                        ;
 
  , ~~\ United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission LICENSE TERMINATION PLAN The plan will describe:
S Site characterization G    Identification of remaining dismantlement activities 9 Plans for site remediation 9 Detailed plans for the final radiation survey 9 Description of the end use of the site if l restrictions are imposed              l 9 Updated site-specific cost estimate of    !
remaining costs                        l 9 Supplement to the Environmental Report describing any new information  !
i 11 l
 
United States
\j'~)'s.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission LICENSE TERMINATION PLAN (continued)
O    Plan receipt will be noticed in the Federal Register and the plan will be made available for public comment l
9    Opportunity for a hearing on the plan will be given 1
O    NRC will also hold a public meeting 9    The plan will be approved by issuance of a license amendment 9    Licensee continues to decommission the site  .
and perform a site radiation survey 9    NRC may perform confirmatory surveys 9    The license is terminated if the license termination plan was followed and the site meets the release criteria 12
 
of%. United States
  \      Nuclear Regulatory Commission DECOMMISSIONING PROJECTS 1
21 power reactors are decommissioning      l 9    3 facilities completed Pathfinder, Shoreham & Fort St. Vrain 9    5 facilities now being dismantled Trojan, Yankee Rowe, Haddam Neck, Big Rock Point, Maine Yankee 9    12 facilities in long-term storage TMI-2, Dresden 1, Fermi 1, VBWR, La Crosse, Peach Bottom 1, Rancho Seco, San Onofre 1, Indian Point 1, Zion 1, Zion 2, Humboldt Bay 9    1 to be determined - Millstone 1 13
 
  ~~\                                            United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission PDINT OF CONTACT FOR LICENSING ACTIONS U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Louis L. Wheeler Mail Stop: 09-D19 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Telephone: (800) 368-5642 (NRC operator)
(301) 415-1444 E-Mail: DXW@NRC. GOV 14
 
(
          ,f,    ~.s,,
{                    I  United States
              ....I              Nuclear Regulatory Commission
,            MILLSTONE 1 DECOMMISSIONING MEETING WATERFORD, CONNECTICUT February 9,1999 Ronald R. Bellamy, PhD.
Chief, Decommissioning & Laboratory Branch Division of Nuclear Materials Safety USNRC Region I Presentation: February 9,1999                        1              02/05/991:44PM C:sil_dec
 
      ., f    ~%,,    ,
l    {                }              United States l          .....                      Nuclear Regulaten Commission o          Region I will manage the inspection program.
e          For a stetion with operating and
:                        permr nently-shutdown reactors, a mix of resident.and regional specialists will perform the inspection activity.
e          Present resident effort is periodic
[approximately monthly? tours of Unit 1, attendance at planning meetings approximately weekly, availn.ble as necessary for interaction with the licensee. Also keeps the regional office and headquarters staff aware of developments.
Presentatiors: Fe*>ruary 9,1999                  2              02/05/99 h44PM C: mil _dec
                                                        ~
 
(            )      United States
      ....l            Nuclear Regulatory Commission e        Region I has been involved in a number of ongoing reactor decommissioning projects e      Yankee Rowe is completing dismantlement and decontamination e      Maine Yankee has completed site characterization and has selected a Decommissioning Operations
                                  ~
Contractor. A spent fuel nuclear island has been established and major dismantlement and
                ' decommissioning efforts are expected to begin Spring 1999.
Presentation: Tebrwy 9,1999              3            o2iosios 1:stru c:mir_sec
 
p- ~s.,,
(              )    United States
          .....            NuclearRegulatory Commission e          Haddam Neck is continuing its                                        I characterization effort and is completing modifications for a spent fuel nuclear island. Major dismantlement and decontamination efforts are expected to begin mid 1999.
e          Peach Bottom 1 is in a long-term storage SAFSTOR condition 1
e          Three Mile Island 2 is in a long-term                                .
SAFSTOR condition l
e          Indian Point 1 is in a long-term SAFSTOR condition L-a- ,n-, ,. in                          4                          onn, ,:ana c:.u sa
 
('
                        )              UnitedStates
            .....                      Nuclear Regulatory Commission e        For reactors in SAFSTOR, the inspection effort is a periodic inspection Kapproximately annually?
to verify the condition of the facility and that degradation has not occurred, supplemented by frequent observations by the resident staff e        For reactors in dismantlement and decontamination, a structured inspection program is established, based on the activities at the site.
* Areas of inspection are:
                        - Organization, Management and Cost Controls
                        - Safety Reviews, Changes. and Presentation: February 9,1999                    S                  wosm 1:aru c:ma_dec
 
p* ~%,,,
{            }        United States
                                        . . . . . ' Nuclear Regulatory Commission l                                              Modifications
                                                    - Self-assessments, Audits, Corrective Actions
                                                    - Decommissioning Performance, Status
                                                    - Preparations for Reactor Fuel Handling
                                                    - Reactor Fuel Handling
                                                    - Maintenance and Surveillance
                                                    - Cold Weather Preparations
                                                    - Spent Fuel Pool Safety
                                                    - Occupational Radiation Exposure
                                                    - Final Surveys
                                                    - Radwaste Treatment, Effluents, Environmental Monitoring
                                                    - Solid Radwaste Management and Transrartation Presentation: February 9,1999                6                      02/05/991:MPM C: mil.dec
- - - - - _ _ _ - - _ - _ - _ _ _ _                                                                                            i
 
f ~s.,,
l              )        United States
                        .....              Nuclear Regulatory Commission
                                    - Evaluation of Emergency Preparedness
                                    - Physical Security G Public involvement will continue.
Inspection reports will continue to be made available, staff will attend meetings as appropriate.
                                    - The resident staff can be contacted at 860-447-3170
                                    - The Region I office can be contacted at 610-337-5000 or 800-432.-1156.
Presentation: February 9,1999            7              02/05/99 1:44PM C: mil _dec
 
ll        l    llll          l      1      ll 1
s t
u t
a S
g            s i
n            i e
c 1
n  g n9 v
r t
i          n i t9      nS e
na          e9 e1 e
he UlP          M,9    tt oSi e g          cyr  R-n n        i l
ba      Cn
                                  .t oi          uu    ke s n t            Prb      ndi l          o Ce      a r s e          y g
l i RF      Fr              r i
s            P            e Ms      i N            e c      E n
r i
V            a m                      l e
c m                        u N
o                        t s
c                          a e                        h e
D                          t r
o s                                      '      N ll
 
l      l'            ,      !!l        ll
-                                                    s o
n t
a              e s            h                i v
t i
e    t  Cs t
cn e  o n Rt n i
t                      t      f  i i                          r f t v      uNe              a      ep s c o i
t        e fo m        t      t c    h          e r        e eg                            .
Rl ei n l
t A      i n vuai oq        2        sn t        a                      di o n    t n e mrleyi    t p n ns e
r i
a ryrpU                  as i
y g
r r      mt st oatr        r    t em                  e e oam n
u      y  ea            p u o E
C      l ul e q ug p ac            l r
a e
a egn f
u ve                        l c
u SRrleoSEd                                      N t
          +  +            +      +                      s a
e h
t r
o s                                                    /  N    -
l1l    ll              l        ll          Ill!
 
l            l        illlli                      l    ,
-                                                        x i
s e    hs e            l l
a      r e
r t 't rn B          st  c r o u          sth f
oed on            ue e        hs at        di e  s Todnb i nn o oa 1
t ie l
a i
ze nP r
sta cmt s                        nh          gU er td          o      e    Ut r                o cN ue s e un                  t e a  v        e r e npinyniy            t t ni r c eo          yt h
iOha t
n              pp o,ci l
o  o        nde a v l
th nt o fe se typ mo ofa ee op r
rr ei c w et Caisf        l h        a nfrm rn se y
g r
sS            pa    s roei r          p y          am wevd      E e
n unl nai    l e e yi k b tds1 l
erti r
a co O          rk er vo    rmfea o  u ate aihw r          a    l e
c OwWnSsyUaA                  e nc              u F                                                          N t
                +      t    +                +            s 2                a e
h t
r o
s                                                        /  N ll'
 
l              I          l1      1
'                                          x ye      s          e r
ai                  a wb l
et          t de emhn r          t rm o
e p
n e
m ns        f  i          s s
Us            sh ws            e e    A      ed s
s rl i
vn            a a e      u ea r r r
e sF          ee vf d
n n                    s ie t
owsn      i nar s s e t. s e i
u                  y g
r e
aN        h      l    e                      E n
i tl ee r ug r l u                  r a
ol e        pf        od r e                    l e
c g            m wph                            u eS          o e n c CniS N
t Not          +            +
s a
e h
t r
o
                                          /      N l1            ll        ll  li l          l  1
 
Il      II11
    -                                s g
n    s s n
r e i
r o    e c          U t      c nfoN e
i ni n    or  et  emr o    c y
ptf ai M            xSn t
i      e yo l      n ybc a    u r c    mts sC  yR i
g    mu od      eN v
l o    c n rd i
u n o  t o    ms      a              y e ot i
n t              g d      vf r e u                    r e
a  i s gdin t c
E n
R      n n oiee c s            r a
e t
e    p n  r e  pnl  t n u l
c u
s a              s          N i
s    e e do e                    t f    RL        I  nCr              s a
f                                    e
            +    +    +                  h O                                  t r
o s                                -  N lll      l
 
            ,l    l              ! l1  1  j\      )
                                          \
y e
v r
u                          -
S            sk l
d    r a s      l eP al l c  n    i f
i f
i go            ed l
t    n a ta a l
oit l
o  a    b dr S L ic              sd r do          o  s o aL      f    ef r                    y r  n e                    g R          tek r    t r
e n
e          a a a                      E t
i          WHW                          l r
a e
f s    .
                    +    ++
N c
u f                                      t s
O                                      h a
e t
r o
s                                      /      N I  ll
 
1    , l          ll          1
  -                                          \
y t
v i
t s                i t
:    n                    c          .
e                    a        s d                            oeh      n e    m e
i dt          i o
d      r                    af r o a t
u    u l      s s s            d yo c c    a n e e a s                e nl n                          c ay i      mc      l y        u t e d av s    n s n      a        o        r y    ono a                rd pe        u e
i t                                s ait        e          -
ece t            y v
r i
d    i al p            net    i r
g e
u    ad r          m        ot ef s        E n
a r a t
sdf o          r S    t cd s l
l i                l a
e el      l c
r eio          M                u i
i N
DF        S          o              t s
          +++                  N                a e
h t
r o
s                                          / N l
 
l
  -                                          s 9        d 9
                    /          e 1
                    /      nt c e t          7      o e v A          b i
ytafah f      a s    .
i y de    t    s s    .
d          oe e1          a mni t    i nt          e r
e r
s v i i Kd et e c mi t dn        2              a aU        Y e    n s
y    g e                    si n Ren        b el o
l i
wg ne    n 0o        t s  ala r    p 0t          s mo              .
y 0s  l i
l at e  t s
y c
g r
e 2l  i oi    l n          E n
e e rM a
g1 ni t    f u g              r a
e e          o nt nt n n i l
c U e ngu                u Y
i t
a op                      N t              o e        t s
SNSCb                        a e
                    +    +  +  +              h t
r o
  '                                          /  N l      ll        ll
 
I l      1      I              1Il      1l
                                            ~
        '                                        s i
n s
s u
nu t  i ot a ya e          rt t
as t
st os        c d t    t a    ead e i
f i      e d      ul ul        cle p    q ege          e u pf U      r e u        se rf e y  t            l    d r    ntcd e ea        at cc t
o    mf l n
i nle d ei a    n r s      hfew c r e l
u    eot          e        i          y mt n      t      ove            g r
g    ade l    t a s r e
n e          emn et t e o nU E
r R      sir        i oN              a e
nmitu di sli i                l c
u ebq c u        d ei n v      a      N i
L sr      e Arf t
s a
e
                +            +                    h t
r o
        '                                        / N lll
 
            .      l          llllllll                      i
-                                                '      \
g n                  g i                    n                g n                  i n                n i
o                  o i
i nb e
s                  s                o o s    o            s )C st i
i i
w            mO s) m  t he              m  (D o r i RmAa r
m  ti t i
s      c o mDe o    w            et              oSy nDc                      c c    s of a n                              e (P s  i e    ost ot r Dt h n                rt D    i n      e o nor pa sC wpet t
r    ol p u                        oe        a      y f
o    g            gsdRl                            g r
e ng n nt us de                                  n g  i nio  ti              het              E n    wi            at i
ti t r
a aSim t
i      ear u r t v                                    l e
c e sitb i
n-    ve ep l
a vp oc u                          N u
n a +RoEOPAs t
s a
l
                      +                +                    e h
P                                                      t r
o s                                                        / N
  !    l      l      l          i
 
l    l        1lllll!llj!!l                              I ll
      -                                                            s r
9    s    e 9    s    t
                                              /
7 e
r r
a 5    8  8                      -  g    u 9-    9-  9-              9 9-  8    o r    Q    9 4-    1  2-                  9    p          9 2-  2                9-  /      -  dr    /
1                              2    n          2 s1        7  1                2  1  i      3    1 e
n t
o g
s                                    s  n l
e                                  l t
t a
i n
o          C
        . i d                                        O mss i  i e
M            t t                      g b  i D
r i
mgn                i n
S u  m f
o j
on wub        i t
e t
e e  y r
m o    R      s e    y g
r o  S    e              M    o  c    A    U      e ad          r M                  c t
a D e    D      n  E n
Mt h    u  t t
e e
i c              i l
b l
u g h    e S P
o n
r a
e u
l S    L  b                      e iusl  t      o  l c
                ~1          u              P  R l
b de i
i u
2  P                                mi    s  N C      ta h t    8 i                                y        b      c  t n  0  U                R    e  sc    u    e    s U    5  N                N  K  ES    S    D      a e
                +    +  +                +  +  +                  h
                                                          +    +    t r
o
      '                                                            / N II
 
Y      ..
J-STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION January 21,1999 e ,0 The Honorable Thomas A. Sheridan First Selectman Ev Town of Waterford
                                                                                                          !E d=
15 Rope Ferry Rd.,                                                                        @ :q Kh Waterford, CT 06385                                                                        ,
                                                                                                          =, y
 
==Dear Mr. Sheridan:==
 
9 I would like to take this opportunity to share with you some information regarding activities conducted by the Depanment of Environmental Protections' Division of Radiation (DEP-DOR).
These activities center around the radiological survey of the Millstone Balifields, and some pertinent information regarding thermoluminescent dosimeters that were utilized to measure exposure to ionizing radiation.
Millstone Balifields. The Division conducted an in depth radiological survey of the following balifields: Rolf, Rotary, Patterson, Babe Ruth, Spera, Greco, Mullins and the Hall Playground Area. The DEP-DOR collected 412 surface soil samples composited into 103 containers for analysis. I15 subsurface and 17 background samples were collected and analyzed. All soil samples were collected, stored and transported under the DEP-DOR agency chain of custody guidelines. The samples were analyzed for alpha, bets ard gamma radiation utilizing established analysis techniques by art independent certified laboratory. The results of the soil sample analysis yield naturally occurring radioactivity and the presence ofisotopes related to weapons fall out which can be considered in both instances to be " background". The DEP-DOR also conducted direct measurements to detect gamma radiation. These direct radiation measurements involved the use cifsodium iodide (Nal) type detectors. These detectors were utilized for surface area scans, intermittent surface level crect measurements and intermittent waist level direct measurements. The entire surface area of each of the seven balifields and playground were surveyed. Waist and ground level measurements were accomplished approximately every ten feet. Numerous areas were discovered that had variations in background radiation levels up to five times background. All of these anomalics where attributed td s ocks, stones or gravel which contain higher concentrations of naturally occurring radioactivity than surficial material. The remaining areas yielded results consistent with        ,
background radiation levels in Southeastern Connecticut.
Environmental Monitoring Program. Untilits termination in January 1998 the DEP DOR participated in an Cooperative Agreement with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (U.S NRC). This agreement tasked the DEP-DOR to collect various environmental media to be analyzed for radioactivity content at the State Department ofHealth Laboratory. Additionally, (r,s.i.e    nuns a rep.,)
79 als st,ut
* Estr.ed, c7 04104 s127 betpJ/dep.asste.st.se An Equal oppersmalry Employer
 
      /.
    /  ,.
Page 2                                                                                                    -
Date Sheridan Memo DEP-DOR was responsible for the placement and retrieval of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's) that were provided by the NRC on a quarterly basis. These dosimeters were positioned in a concentric pattern around the Haddam neck and Millstone Point facilities. The NRC utilized the "UD 800 series" Panasonic TLD's which afford excellent energy resolution throughout the range of expected exposures that members of the general public could possibly be exposed to during an offsite release of radioactivity during a nuclear power plant incident. The measured radiation levels are reported in units ofmilliroentgen. They are quarterly gross exposures and                ,
include expostres received while the dosimeters were in transit as well as exposures received in the field. A control TLD, accompanies the TLD shipment during transit and was stored in a low background area while the other TLD's were in the field. 'Ihe results of the quarterly exposure was published by the NRC. The DEP-DOR was responsible for the emplacement ofretrieval of these TLD's. Additionally, the DEP-DOR received from the utility various environmental samples that were analyzed by the Department of Health radiochemistry laboratory. The results of the analysis of these samples were reported to the NRC by the DEP-DOR in an annual report.
I trust that this memo has provided you with some pertinent information with regards to activities that the DEP DOR has performed in and around the Millstone Station area. Ifyou need further clarification on any of these issues, or ifI can provide you with further infonnation please feel ,
free to contact me at telephone number (860) 424-3029.
Sincerely,                                                .
YN Edward L. Wilds Jr. P.hD Director Division of Radiation                                          -
Bureau of Air Management
                                        .s e
h
                                                              '.*
* f
* y
_ _ - . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _}}

Latest revision as of 02:01, 30 December 2020

Transcript of 990209 Millstone Unit 1 Decommissioning Public Meeting in Waterford,Ct.Pp 1-89.Supporting Documentation Encl
ML20205D776
Person / Time
Site: Millstone Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 02/09/1999
From:
NRC
To:
Shared Package
ML20205D763 List:
References
NUDOCS 9904020298
Download: ML20205D776 (124)
v • d • e


Text

. .

OR GINAL OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Title:

MILLSTONE, UNIT 1 DECOMMISSIONING PUBLIC MEETING 0 .

Case No:. -

t Work Order No.: ASB-300-651 LOCATION: Waterford, CT DA*IE: Tuesday, February 9,1999 PAGES: 1 - 89 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

1025 Connecticut Avenue,NW, Suite 1014

-Washington, D.C. 20036

, G02) 842 0034

  • 245 P$R DO O T PDR

7_

1 !

\

1 BEFORE THE l 2- U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 ***

4 MILLSTONE UNIT 1, DECOMMISSIONING PUBLIC MEETING 5 ***

, l l 6

.7 Waterford Town Hall 1

8 15 Ropes Ferry Road 9 Waterford, CT 10 11 Tuesday, February 9, 1999 12 The above-entitled meeting commenced, pursuar t to 13 notice, at 7:00 p.m.  !

i 14 f

15 PARTIC7. PANTS: 1 16 On Be'.lalf of the Town of Waterford:

17 TONY SHERIDAN, First Selectman, Town of Waterford 18 On Buhalf of the NRC Staff:

19 DUKE WHEELER, NRC Licensing Project Manager for-20 Millstone Unit 1, Decommissioning Project 21 Directorate 22 DR. MICHAEL MASNIK, Chief, NRC Decommissioning 23 Section 24 PHIL RAY, Project Manager for Millstone Unit 1, 25 Decommissioning Project Directorate ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters

-1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 l (202) 842-0034

l 2 1 PARTICIPANTS: [ Continued) 2 ETOY HYLTON, Licensing Assistant 3 PATRICIA MILLIGAN, Health Physicist and Nuclear 4 Pharmacist J

5 BILL HUFFMAN, Staff, Decommissioning Licensing 6 Project Management 7 STEVEN DEMBEK, previous Licensing Project Manager, l

)

8 Millstone Unit 1 I l

9 SAM NALLUSWAMI, Decommissioning Project 10 Directorate /NRC 11 DR. RON BELLAMY, Chief of the Decommissioning and j 12 Laboratory Branch, NRC Region I 13 PAUL CATALDO, Resident Inspection staff, Millstone 14 NEIL SHEEHAN, Public Affairs Office, Region I 15 ANN HODGDON, Esquire, Office of the General 16 Counsel 17 JIM SHEPHERD, Millstone 1 Project Manager 18 19 On Behalf of Northeast Utilities and Millstone Station:

20 FRANK ROTHEN, Vice. President of Site Services, 21 Millstone Station 22 ERNIE HARKNESS, Unit Director for Operations, Millstone 23 Unit 1 24 RON SACHATELLO, Project Manager of Site Characterization, 25 Millstone Unit 1 I

l f ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

l Court Reporters .

1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014  !

Washington, D.C. 20036 q (202) 842-0034 l

I 3 1 PARTICIPANTS: [ Continued) 2 SPEAKERS:

3 SAL MANGIAGLI 4 v8N GUTSHALL 5 PETE REYNOLDS 6 PRALIS BUILDMORE 7' JOE BESADE 8 JOE AMARELLO 9 GERALYN WINSLOW 10 MARK HOLLOWAY 11 EVAN WOOLCOTT 12 PAUL BLANCH 13 MARY KUHAN 14 1 15 1

16 i.

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

E 4

1 PROCEEDINGS 2 [7 : 00 p.m.1 3 MR. SHERIDAN: Good evening, everyone. First of 4 all,'I would like to ask everyone if they could be seated so j l

5 we can get started.

6 First of all, I would like to thank all of you for 7 co.Aing . I am Tony Sheridan, the First Selectman of 1

8 Waterford, and these other folks at the table, at the 9 various tables here, will be introduced as we progras'.

10 I would like to start by trying to establich come 11 groundrules. This is really a new era for the town of 12 Waterford. Up until now we were talking about ever the 13 years construction and management of plants. Now we are 14 talking about decommissioning Unit 1, so there's a little l 2

15 bit of a learning curve we are all going to go.through here. l 16 We -- I say "we" -- the town of Waterford through 17 our representative, and I think he is here somewhere in the 1

18 audience, I thought I saw him -- George Peteros -- where are l 19 you, George? There you are.

20 George has been representing the town of Waterford 21 on the Citizen Advisory Committee at the Haddam Neck plant, 22 so we are all trying to educate ourselves.

23 I want to thank the NRC people for coming tonight 24 to start this public process, and also the NU people for 25 being here to outline what they and how they hope to go ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

5 1 about decommissioning Unit 1.

2 In an effort to be fair with everyone, I think it 3 is important that we try to first and foremost respect 4 everyone's opinion. Everybody has an opinion and'it is a 5 public meeting and we would appreciate that bit of common 6 courtesy.

7 The second thing I would like to suggest is that 8 we restrain our remarks to about three minutes each first 9 time around. These people have agreed to be here up until 10 10 o' clock and if the meeting ends earlier than that they 11 will also hang around and have individual questions asked of 12 them, so if we could agree to that, we'll try to be fair 13 with everybody, give everyone a fair opportunity to be heard 14 and also I am told this is the first of a number of meetings 15 we will have.

16 So tonight is really the beginning and with that I 17 would like to remind everybody that there is a sign-up sheet 18 at the back of the room. If you want to speak, please sign 19 up and when you come forward to speak, I would appreciate it 20 if you would for the record identify yourself, so that we 21 know who you are and that if there is a follow-up question 22 to be answered that we know where to send it and who to 23 address it to.

24 There is a second sheet in the back of the room {

25 for individuals who may want a transcript -- I believe that ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014  !

Washington, D.C. 20036 I (202) 842-0034 i

6 1 is what you want to have happen -- a transcript sent to them 2 of the meeting. I think that is important for the record

'3 and if you know of somebody who would like to know what is 4 going on with these meetings, please put their name and 5 address on the second sign-up sheet and we will see that --

6 NRC will see that the transcript of the meeting is forwarded 7 to that individual.

8 Okay. We have an agenda. What I would like to do 9 at this time is to introduce Duke Wheeler, who is the lead

)

10 person -- he is the License Project Manager for i

11 Decommissioning of Unit 1 and ask if Duke-then would 12 introduce the NRC folks who are here to help answer any 1

13 questions.

1

.14 I know there's been a lot of interest in all of 15 the units out there and I want to really establish this rule 16 for this evening. These people are not here to answer I 17 questions about 2 or 3. They don't have the right technical 1

18 staff with them, so we want to try to limit our comments and 19 questions to the decommissioning process of Unit 1. i So i 20 With that,. Duke, if you could start I would A

21 appreciate it.

22 MR. WHEELER: Thank you, Tony.

23 ,

Good evening and thank you for taking time to come 24 to this meeting with the NRC Staff to participate in our 15 regulatory program for the decommissioning of Millstone Unit

. ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

r 1

7 1 1. As Tony mentioned, I am Duke Wheeler and I am the 2 Licensing Project Manager for Millstone Unit 1 in our 3 Decommissioning Project Directorate.

4 We transferred Unit 1 from our Special Projects i

5 Of fice to the Decommissioning Project Directorate shortly 6 after we received certification from the licensee that Unit ,

)

7 1 had permanently ceased operations and that the fuel had 8 been permanently removed from the reactor vessel, so please 9 note that the licensing actions for the decommissioning of 10 Millstone Unit 1 are being supervised by a different part of 11 the NRC Staff organization than licensing actions for Units 12 2 and 3.

13 We understand that substantial interest and 14 attention may also exist for Unit 2 and 3, but those plants, l

15 as Tony meationed, are beyond the scope of this evening's

)

16 meeting and we don't have a full complement of NRC Staff 17 present tonight to address interests related to our 18 oversight of Units 2 and 3.

19 Before going any further, I would like to 20 introduce the rest of the NRC Staff who is here this 21 evening.

l 22 Dr. Seymour Weiss was going to be here but he was i 23 unable to make it. He is the Director of the Non-Power 24 Reactors and Decommissioning Project Direccorate. l 25 Dr. Michael Masnik, to my right, is the Chief of i ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. i Court Reporters l 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 l Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

1 8

1 the Decommissioning Section under Dr. Weiss, and he is my 2 immediate supervisor. He supervises 14 Project Managers 3 such as myself who are involved in various aspects of the 4 decommissioning program which at the present time includes 5 decommissioning related activities at 18 nuclear power 6 plants across the country.

7 One of those 14 professionals supervised by Dr.

8 Masnik is Mr. Phil Ray, who is also working the slide 9 projector, and he is the backup Project Manager in our 10 Decommissioning Project Directorate for Millstone Unit 1.

11 Also with us tonight is Ms. Etoy Hylton. She is 12 our Licensing Assistant and is at the back of the room when 13 you first came in to assist you with getting your names on i

14 the sign-up lists if you have that interest.

15 Ms. Patricia Milligan is with us tonight. She is a 16 health physicist certified by the American Board of Health 17' Physics and she is also a board-certified nuclear 18 pharmacist.

19 Mr. Bill Huffman is one of our more recent 20 additions to the_ Decommissioning Licensing Project 21 Management staff, and he also works for Dr. Masnik.

22 Mr. Steven Dembek is the previous Licensing 23 Project Manager.for Unit 1.

24 We also have with us Mr. Sam Nalluswami, who is on 25 a rotational assignment to our Decommissioning Project 1 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court-Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW,_ Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

9 1 Directorate from our Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and 2 Safeguards.

3. Also with us, to my immediate right, is Dr. Ron 1

4 Bellamy. He is the Chief of the Decommissioning and 5 Laboratory Branch in our Region I office and will follow my l

6 pre'sentation of the Licensing Program with a brief '

7 discussion of our inspection program for decommissioning 8 power reactors.

9 Mr. Paul Cataldo is with us, and he is 10 representing our Resident Inspection staff here at the site.

11 Mr. Neil Sheehan is here from our Region I Public 12 Affairs Office and Ms. Ann Hodgdon is here and she is an 13 attorney specializing in decommissioning activities in our 14 Office of the General Counsel.

15 From our Office of. Nuclear Materials, Safety and j 16 Safeguards we also have Mr. Jim Shepherd and he is the

17. Millstone 1 Project Manager in that office.

18 What I would like to do this evening is give you a i 19 brief outline of my presentation for this evening.

O#

Topics I 20 will address are, first of all, a quick comment on just what l

21_ decommissioning really is and then also a few comments on 22 those things.that are not considered to be decommissioning 23 from our perspective.

24 I will comment on what the NRC's focus is during 25 the decommissioning process and I will identify some  !

l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

10 1 alternatives that are available to the licensee during the 2 ' process. I'll ta2k about what some of the decommissioning 3 ' process requirements are. I will talk about what the 4 post-shutdown decommissioning activities report is and I 5 will also describe some additional restrictions that we 6 place on the licensee.

7 I will comment on some of the financial aspects of 8 the NRC's decommissioning regulations.

9 Another important document that I will touch on is )

10 the License Termination Plan.

11 Next I will talk a little bit about 1

12 decommissioning experiences elsewhere. We recognize that 13 this is new to the Waterford community but it is not new to i

14 many other communities across the country.  !

15 I will also give you some information.on how to 16 contact me at NRC Headquarters as your point of contact for 17 interests that.you might have related to our licensing 18 program for decommissioning power reactors and how it is 19 being applied to Unit 1.

20 The NRC presentation this evening will be 21 concluded by Dr. Bellamy giving a description of the NRC's 22 inspection program for decommissioning plants.

l

-23 First of all, what is decommissioning? l O

24 Decommissioning is the removal of 4He power plant safely 25 from service and a reduction of the residual radioactive l

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters i 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 i (202) 842-0034 l

11 1 materials at the site to permit release of the property and 2 termination of the license.

3 Some things that are not decommissioning -- this 4 is very important. Decommissioning does not encompass from 5 the NRC's regulatory perspective any non-radiological 6 decommissioning. If you have a facility that has been 7 cleaned of its radioactive contamination and is acceptable 8 for release if the licensee chooses to further clean up or 9 dismantle the facility the costs incurred by such activities 10 are not regulatory decommissioning costs.

as 11 Site restoration activities -- if 4dwr licensee 12 chooses to restore the site to its original character prior 13 to the building of the power plant those costs too are not 14 considered regulatory decommissioning costs.

15 Lastly, spent fuel management and funding -- we 16 have observed that licensees of decommissioning plants 17 across the country spend a significant portion of' time and 18 money dealing with safely managing and eventually disposing 19 of the spent fuel. We expect the same will apply here at 20' Millstone. Those costs associated with the care and 21 management of the spent fuel are not regulatory 22 Edecommissioning costJ.

23 Now what is the NRC Staff's focus during the 24 decommissioning of a power reactor? Quite simply, the NRC's 25 primary focus is on the removal of radiological hazards.

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters .

1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014  !

Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034- l l

i

I 12 1 The first step in that process is to safely remove the' 2 facility from service and then the licensee reduces )

3 radioactive contamination to levels that will allow release 4 of the site.

I 5 The licensee will then perform a detailed final '

6 radiological survey and the NRC Staff may perform a 7 confirmatory survey to strengthen our assurance that the 8 site meets the specified criteria for release.

9 Finally, if the release criteria are met and the 10 terms and conditions of the License Termination Plan are met 11 and any hearing conditions that may occur are met, then the j 12 license may be terminated and at this point NRC regulatory 13 activities would end. )

14 With respect to decommissioning alternatives, the 15, licensee basically has three choices. One choice is to 16 begin decontaminating and dismantling the plant soon after 17- certifying to us that plant operations have been permanently 18 ceased and the fuel permanently removed from the reactor 19 vessel.

20 A second choice is to place the plant in what we 21 call SAFSTOR where decontamination and dismantling ,

)

22 activities are deferred to some later date. Licensees can )

l 23 choose to take up to 60 years to terminate the license. For i

\

24 example, they could put the plant in long-term storage for 25- 50 years, then take five to 10 years to complete the j ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

l 13 4

)

1 dismantlement and decontamination as long as they complete 2 the process in 60 years. I 3 The third choice that they can adopt is a j I

4 combination of the first two choices. J 5 An important point here is that the NRC has found 6 either of these alternatives or a combination of these l 7 alternatives to be acceptable. I The risk to the public from i l

8 decommissioning is significantly reduced from when the I 9 facility was in operation. In recognition of that reduced 10 risk our regulatory requirements may be reduced during 11 decommissioning of-the facility.

12 Now what is involved in the process? The first 13 thing we expect to see is the certifications from the 14 licensee that they have permanently ceased operations and 15 the fuel has been permanently removed from the reactor 16 vessel. We received these certifications in a letter to the 17 Commission dated July the 21st, 1998.

18 Once these certifications have been submitted the 19 licensee cannot change their mind and go back and operate 20 the plant again. These certifications are a significant 21 step and they are an irreversible action, and as I noted for 22 Millstone Unit 1, they have occurred.

23 Next, we require the licensee to submit a Post 24 Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report within two years 25 of those certifications being docketed. We also require ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 l

14 1 that a site-specific decommissioning cost estimate be 2 submitted within the same'timeframe.

3 The_PSDAR is required to provide a description of u 4- the planned decommissioning activities and we also expect to 5 see a schedule for the accomplishment of those activities.

WI//

6 We g require that the PSDAR include an estimate of the 7 expected costs associated with decommissioning and we also 8 require the licensee to provide the reasons for which they 9 have concluded that the environmental impact associated with 10 decommissioning is within the existing bounds of the 11~ Environmental Impact Statements associated with the IL licensing of the facility or our rulemakings regarding 13 decommissioning.

14 Within about two months of receiving the PSDAR, we 15 will hold another public meeting very similar to.this one in 16 the vicinity of the site. For Millstone 1 the licensee has 17 not submitted a PSDAR yet, so this meeting tonight is not 18 the PSDAR meeting, so.we will get a chance to have another 19 meeting like this after the.PSDAR is received by us.

20 Also, the NRC Staff does not approve the 21 licensees PSDAR,. Instead, we make a determination as to 12 2 whether or not the licensee has submitted the information 23 required by our regulations. The PSDAR accomplishes several 24 things. It informs the public of the licensee's plans for 25 decommissioning. It also aids us in planning our inspection ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036

, . (202) 842-0034

i 15 1 activities. It forces the licensee to re-examine their 2 financial resources available for decommissioning and it 3 requires the licensee to evaluate the environmental impacts, 4 as I mentioned a few minutes ago.

5 One comment -- the PSDARs 4 hat we have received in 6 the past_have been relatively small documents, typically 15 7 to 20 pages and this is acceptable for our purposes as long 8 as they include the information required by our regulations.

9 Ninety days after the licensee submits their PSDAR 10 they can begin to actively dismantle the facility if they 11 have chosen the Decon alternative or if they selected the 12 SAFSTOR option they can continue to keep the facility in a 13 safe, stable configuration.

14 Now what are some of the financial aspects of our 15 decommissioning regulations? We understand that State 16 Public Utilities' Commissions have certain regulatory 17 authority over decommissioning trusts. We have regulations 18 related to the licensee having access to those funds. From 19 our regulatory perspective we allow staged access to those 20 funds. At any time prior to and during decommissioning the 21 licensee would have access to up to 3 percent of the amount 22 of decommissioning trust funds for decommissioning planning 23 purposes. This is for planning, for getting ready for 24 decommissioning. It is not for actual decontamination, 25 ' demonstration projects, or the like.

, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

l 16 1 Licensees are also permitted access to an 2 additional 20 percent of the decommissioning trust once we l 3 have received the Post Shutdown Decommissioning Activities 4 Report.

l 5 Once we have received the site-specific 6 decommissioning cost estimate, then they have full access to 7 the decommissioning trust fund from our perspective. Our 8 regulations are in addition to and do not take the place of I 9 Public Utilities Commission controls. Licensees must comply 10 with both sets of regulations.

l 11 There are some additional restrictions placed on 12 licensees once they begin the decommissioning process. l 13 Licensees are prohibited from performing any decommissioning 14 activity that would foreclose the release of the site for 15 possible unrestricted use. They are also prohibited from l

16 performing any activity that would result in a significant l 17 environmental impact that has not been previously considered 1

18 or evaluated. Likewise, they are also prohibited from 19 performing an activity that results in or no longer provides 20' reasonable assurance that adequate funds will be available 21 to complete the decommissioning.

'22 When a licensee approaches the end of the 23 decommissioning program, within two years of the time they 24 expect the license to be terminated we expect to receive a 25 License Termination Plan. In this plan we expect to see, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters i 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 u_ ____

17 1 among other things, a detailed site characterization. We 2 also expect to see an identification of any remaining 3 dismantlement activities. We expect to see plans for site ]

4 remediation, detailed plans for the final radiation survey 5 and a description of the end use of the site if the licensee 6 intends that the site be released under restricted 7 conditions.

l 8 We expect to see an updated site-specific cost 9 estimate regarding the residual costs for finishing the 10 decommissioning of the facility and the site and we would 11 also expect to see a supplement to the environmental report 12 describing any new information or significant changes l 13 associated with the licensee's termination activities.

14 When we receive the License Termination Plan, we 15 will notice receipt of it in the Federal Register and it 16 will be made available for public comment. Likewise, since 17 we approve this plan by a license amendment, there will also l

18 be an opportunity for a public hearing and the NRC will once 19 again hold a public meeting similar to this one in the 20 vicinity of the site.

21 Once the licensee completes their site radiation 22 survey or concurrently with that survey the NRC Staff may 23 perform an independent confirmatory survey. The license 24 will then be terminated, as I indicated earlier, once we are 25 satisfied that the site has met the applicable release ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

18 1 criteria, any conditions or terms that are imposed by the

2. License Termination Plan, and any conditions resulting from 3 our hearing process.

'4 Now this concludes my overview of the licensing 5 aspects of our regulatory process for decommissioning power 6 reactors. Although the decommissioning of a nuclear power 7 plant is new to the Millstone and Waterford community, you 8 do share this experience with other communities around the 9 country. Currently there are 21 reactors that have started 10 the decommissioning process. Three of these facilities have 11- actually completed the process.

12 There are 18 other reactors now including 13 Millstone 1 in decommissioning. Five of them are currently 14 z being dismantled. There'are 12 facilities that are 15 -currently in SAFSTOR and we-have not yet been informed yet 16 of the decommissioning option that the licensee will select 17 for Millstone Unit 1, so as you can see, the NRC Staff has a 18 lot of experience in the decommissioning of nuclear power-19 plants.

20 Lastly, I would like to leave you with my name as 21 a point of contact for questions related to the NRC 22- - licensing. program for the decommissioning of nuclear power 23 plants. Please feel free to contact me at NRC Headquarters.

24 At this time I would like to turn the microphone 25 over to Dr. Bellamy, who will discuss the program he ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

1

)

1 19 i supervises for our inspections'at decommissioning power 2 reactors. Thank you for your attention.

3 MR. BELLAMY: What we have done in Region I is 4 basically to recognize that the decommissioning projects 5 that are being undertaken in Region I are a significant part 6 of our work activity and have created a specific branch that 7 solely looks at the decommissioning projects in Region I and 8 that is the branch that I presently manage. In addition to 9 the decommissioning projects, I also have under me the 10 responsibility for the Region I radiological laboratory that 11 is in our office in King of Prussia and also the independent 12 measurements mobile radiological van which is still 13 operational I have at my disposal if I decide that it needs 14 to be brought here or any other site in the region for 15 independent measurements of the licensee radiological 16 samples.

17 The distinction between a station with operating 18 and permanently shutdown reactors is significant when it 19 comes to how the region will perform its inspection 20 activities. Here at the Millstone station because of Units 21 2 and 3 we have a significant pool of resources that we will 22 use as the decommissioning is undergone to help us with the 23 inspection activity.

24 I will be in continuous contact with them, my i'

25 staff will be in contact with them, and we will be able to ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

} Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

20 1 determine what the appropriate mix is of both resident and 2 regional specialists that will be able to come out here and 3 perform the. required inspection activities, and a little 4 later I will get into what those inspection activities are.

5 The present resident < effort is periodic tours.

6 They are doing that a little more frequently.than monthly

7. now, but I think that is what we will start with to ensure 8 that there is no degradation of the racility, they are 9 attending the planning meetings that are being undertaken at 10 the site, and they are keeping both the Regional office and 11 the Headquarters Staff aware of developments, and again that 12 is a significant resource that we have a great luxury here 13 at the site to use.

14 Duke indicated that there has been a significant 15 experience of decommissioning within the NRC and most of 16 that has been in Region I-if you go back and take a look at 17 it.

18 Yankee Rowe is now completing its dismantlement 19 and decontamination activities.

20 Maine Yankee has completed site characterization.

21 They have selected ~a contractor as a decommissioning

~

22 operations contractor to come in and run that facility for 23 them. '

A spent nuclear fuel island has been established. ,

I 24 They have put the plant is what is called an official cold {

25 and dark status as of December 30, 1998, and they believe ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES,.LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036.

(202) 842-0034

21 1 the major dismantlement and decommissioning efforts will 2 begin in the spring of 1999. At that time there will be a 3 significant influx of radiation specialis.s from the-4 Regional office to ensure that the activities are undergone 5 in a safe and competent manner.

6 Haddam Neck is continuing its characterization 7 effort and they are now completing their modifications for a 8 similar spent fuel nuclear island. Their major 9 dismantlement and decontamination efforts are expected to 10 begin in about mid-1999. They have not selected a 11 decommissioning operations contractor as of this date.

12 Peach Bottom 1, TMI-2, and Indian Point 1 are in 13 longterm SAFSTOR condition and there is a specifin 14 inspection activity that we do at those facilities. I have 15 assigned inspectors to each of those facilities and they are 16 required to visit those facilities and do a full inspection 17 at least once a year. That inspection activity is 18 documented and those inspection reports are available.

19 Those visits are simply to verify that the condition of the 20 facility has not degraded and again I can supplement that in is 21 those situations where there wee a resident staff available, 22 such as Peach Bottom, TMI, and the Indian Point sites'.

23 The major inspection activities in the region when 24 it comes to decommissioning of reactors are those that are 25 actively undergoing dismantlemerc and decontamination.

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

22 1 There is a specific manual chapter that we use to ensure 2 that all of the inspection areas are appropriately covered.

3 The frequency of the inspections ir based a lot on l

4 what is going on at the site. It is based a lot on the 5 input of any members of the public that believe that there 6 is an area that we need to look at. It's based on a number 7 of activities.that are folded into what is best use of 8 resources so we can be there at the heightened times of ,

I' 9 activity to ensure that the dismantlement and 10 decontamination is being done in a safe manner. .

1 11 The areas of inspection are all-encompassing. We l l 12 look at the organization of the licensee, its management and 13 cost controls. We look at how they are doing their safety 14 reviews, how they make changes to their safety reviews and 15, their procedures and how they are going to make 16 modifications to the facility.

17' We look at their self-assessments.

18 Self-assessments is a significant factor in how we view how 19 the licensee is doing. We look at how they are doing their 20 audits. We look at who is doing their audits. We look at l i

21 the findings that come out.of those self-assessments and 22 audits and we look at how they track and imp]ement the {

23 corrective actions for the findings that they observe.

24 We look at the preparations for reactor fuel 25 handling. We verify that there are certified fuel handlers ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

1 23 1 trained on staff, onsite, and able to perform the reactor 2 fuel handling in a safe and competent manner.

3 We continually look at maintenance and 4 surveillance. Annually we look at cold weather 5 preparations, end# e look at the safety of the spent iuel 6 pool. There is a continuous review of occupational 7 radiation exposure. When we get to the final survey stage 9n /

8 of the plant our activities will-get a ramp-up. I will have 9 contractors out here in accordance and in agreement with the 10 Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards to do a 9

11 very significant confirmatory effort activity once the 12 licensee's License Termination Plan has been submitted, as 13 already explained.

14 We look at radwaste treatment, we look at the 15 effluents from the plant and we look at the licensee's 16 ability to monitor the effluents and their ability to 17 monitor the environment. We will split samples with them.

18 We will take independent measurements continually and we 19 will verify not only that the licensee's measurements are 20 accurate, but their program to monitor the radioactivity is 21 appropriate and.has the appropriate sensitivity and 22 acc. racy. We will not initiate a program where we will l

! 23 continually monitor the licensee effluents from the plant 24 whether those be solid, liquid or gaseous, but we will do a 25 routine audit to ensure that again, first, we are satisfied l

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

I Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

24 1 with their program, and we will independently split samples 2 to verify that those measurements are accurate.

3 We look at the solid radwaste management 4 activities on site both during the decommissioning and 5 dismantlement and at the end when major components are tut W 6 removed and 4Nr look at the transportation of those 7 components and radioactive material offsite.

8 We look at emergency preparedness. We would 9 expec Jth in the areas of emergency preparedness and 10 physical security that there will be changes to the 11 licensee's program that is now submitted on the docket. Mr.

12 Wheeler and his staff will review them and make the 13 appropriate licensing reviews and any appropriate changes to 14 the license'and license conditions and then we will do 15 inspections to verify that there is still an adequate state 16 of emergency preparedness. We will have inspectors out here 17 to actually monitor drills and exercises and again to report 18 on those activities in a written and public forum.

19 We think that.the public involvement in this 20 process is important from a regional perspective as well as 21 from the Headquarters perspective. All of our inspection 22 reports will continue to be made available to you. I or 23 appropriate members of my staff will be glad to attend 24 future public meetingc. We will be here at the PSDAR public 25 meeting that Mr. Wheeler has mentioned and we are also

. ANN RILEY % ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

F~

25 4

1 continually availabla for comments, questions or concerns 2 that you may have.

3 The Region I office can be contacted at the (610) 4 number up here. You can either ask for me directly or you 5 can ask for the Decommissioning Branch. They will know who 6 I am and they will get me very quickly. We have the 7 (800) number that is listed up there.

8 I would also encourage you now o.n er that 9 there is resident staff at Millstone. Mr. . al Cataldo is 10 very familiar with the Unit 1 facility. I have listed his 11 number here and again he is also ready, willing and able to 12 take any of your concerns, questions, or comments at any 13 time.

14 You can also get us through the Headquarters 15 Operations Officer. They know how to get I or a member of 16 my staff 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> a day, seven days a week, 52 weeks out of 17 the year, and I can tell you that that process does work, ao 18 if there is something that is of great health and safety 19 significance and you need to talk to somebody, we will find 20 a technical person to talk to you at whatever hour you think 21 it is appropriate.

22 Duke did put his E-mail address on his slide. I 23 will also tell you that can also be reached by E-mail. My 24 E-mail initials are RRB1 C. gov and I wocid be more than 25 willing to accept any E-mail comments, questions or concerns e

r ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

  • Mi % M

26 l' that you might have.

NHCEL E/2 l 2 MR. 4HER+ BAN- Thank you, Ron. We are at that I

-3 point in the agenda -- in organizing this meeting _I did 4 invite the utility to join us for a brief description for 5 you of the present status of their decommissioning plans.

6 Mr. Frank Rothen is here with us to do that, and he will do 7 that at this time.

8 MR. ROTHEN: Thank you, Mr. Wheeler. My name is 9 Frank Rothen. I am the Vice President of Site Services for 10 Millstone Station. I am also the corporate officer 11 responsible for the decommissioning of Millstone Unit 1.

12 With me tonight is Ernie Harkness, who is the Unit 13 Director for Operations at Millstone Unit 1 and also Ron 14 Sachatello, who is going to be working the slides there for 15 us, who is the Project Manager of the Site Characterization 16 at Millstone.

17 Our number one priority is to maintain the unit in 18 a safe condition. We have been working vigorously towards 19 that end as we are coming up with the overall 20 decommissioning plan. We have a number of priorities on the 21 station right now currently, and the number one priority for 22 us is the safe operation of Millstone 3, followed very 23 closely by the restart of Unit 2. I 24 This takes on significance for Unit 1 activities 25- because we have several' systems on Unit 1 that the Unit 1 i

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. j

/

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014

. Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034'

27 '

1- staff is responsible for'that is required for the operations 2~ of Millstone-Unit 2 and 3 and that is part of our licensing

~

'3 responsibility.

4 We are in the-process of evaluating and selecting 5' an effective decommissioning option. As Mr. Wheeler had

'6 stated, there are two options availabl'e to us. One is 7 SAFSTOR and the other one is dismantlement. We have yet to 8 reach a conclusion on the method that we will use. It is 9 hoped that by.the middle of the summer, hopefully by the end 10 of the second quarter or the beginning of the third quarter 11 we will be able to make that presentation to the NRC and 12 then we.will have a public hearing on that so we can share 13 it with the public.

14 Our overall philosophy is to conduct all work in a 15 safe and planned-manner and I know that there.are times --

-16 we have been shut down now for 11 months -- since we 17 announced that we are going to go into the decommissioning 18 phase that there's been some frustratien expressed that we 19 are moving quite slowly. We have by law two years and in 20 order to prepare the PSDAR we feel that it is important that 21 we take the time and in a very deliberate and direct manner 22 look out for the best means we can to come up with a 23 -solution to the problem that will be acceptable not only to 24' .the regulator but to the public.

25 Our safety performance is not one just from a ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Repo~ ers 102S Connecticut Avenut NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

28 1 regulatory perspective. We look at industrial safety as 2 being very high on our list also, and that comes through 3 with the careful, dedicated approach. Basically what we 4 have done is gone through work planning activities on a case 5 by case basis. We have taken the time to brief properly all 6 individuals that are working on the unit. We are using a 7 very deliberate process to do that and it has paid off i

8 di'tidends from the industrial safety perspective and that j 1

9 the unit right now currently, I am proud to say, has had 10 over 720,000 man-hours without a lost time accident and in 11 this past year the unit was given the President's Award from 12 Northeast Utilities for.being the safest plant in their 13 system.

14 AUDIFNCE PARTICIPANT: Bravo, bravo.

15 MR. ROTHEN: Negotiations are underway. currently 16 to sell the new fuel assemblies that we had purchased when 17 we thought the unit was still going to be operational. We l 18 ~ had purchased a partial core at that time. There were a lot 19 of questions on what we were going to do with that fuel. We scWccJ of%tr 20 are currently in negotiations with 44we utilities looking for 21 the best possible method to sell that fuel and move it 22 offsite and we will be in contact with the regulator when we 23 decide to do that.

24 Offsite radiological monitoring -- there have been 25 a lot of concerns raised in the community about radiological 9

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

29 1 issues that have come up, whether or not they were safe, if 2 there"was any of the-contamination issues associated with

.3 Millstone that might be in the community.

4' We had at the time of construction of the facility 5 at Millstone Station we had given a lot of fill to various 6 areas in the community. We had given fill to Harkness State 7 Park and we had given fill to the ballfields. There is a 8 huge mound of dirt out there on the property that has also 9 ccme into question. There was issues raised by a number of 10 citizens as to whether or.not it was safe for their people 11 to use those ballfields. There was issues raised by the 12 First Selectman, Tony Sheridan, and we have gone out and 13 'done numerous surveys. . The NRC has done numerous surveys.

14 The DEP has done numerous surveys. The ballfields in 15 Waterford alone we did surveys that amounted to over 100,000 16 check-points on that field. We did a pattern that was 17 broken down into squares the size of a foot and over 100,000 18 samples were taken in those areas, as measurements were l 19 taken to verify that in fact every inch of that ballfield 20 was safe, and we are proud to say that the DEP sent a letter l l

21 to the Town of Waterford this past week confirming that all 22 their independent surveys, which were as extensive as 23 Millstone's, verified the fact that these areas are 24 radiologically free of any contamination.

25 As I said earlier, the surveys involved the i

I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. ,

Court Reporters i 1025' Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 342-0034

)

30 1 Waterford ballfielde, the Harkness State Park and the 2 Waterford landfill. The surveys included direct radiation 3 measurements, field radiation scans, soil sample analysis, 4 and again ru) Millstone-produced radioactivity was detected 5 at any of these offsite locations.

6 The Year 2000 readiness, the Millennium -- big 7 issue. Everybody is bringing it up. We have had a 8 presentation at the request of CRC at the Waterford Library 1

)

9 about a week and a half ago where there was a large debate 10 about that. We have another one planned on the 18th for the 11 Nuclear Energy Advisory Commission. We will be making a 12 presentation there.

13 There really is, as we have gone through this 14 review we have a mandate from the NRC to be able to be Y2K 15 compliant and have a plan in place by July 1st of this year.

16 We are comfortable that we are on target to be able to meet 17 that objective.

18 We have had independent surveys done of our 19 program and it has been audited by people outside of 20 Northeast Utilities to verify that we are meeting the intent 21 of the plan and program. In the case of Unit 1 we find that- I l

22 there are no systems in need of remediation and right now {

i

{

23 the bulk of the systems on Millstone Station in general j l

24 terms we find that there is very little remediation that we 25 have identified that is required on any of the safety ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

m 1 31

1. systems. -Basically the vintage of the plants are such that 2 because of their age almost any of the computer systems that 3 we have tied in are basically for monitoring those systems 4 and not the actual control and operation of those systems as 5 is.the case on-some of the newer plants.

6 We have contingency plans we are formulating right 7 now. One of the concerns that we have that deals with Y2K 8 is the services we receive offsite -- offsite power,. water, 9 communications and those issue that are outside of our 10 control. We are developing currently contingency plans to 11 make sure that we are able to safely and effectively operate

-12 our plants and in the case of Millstone Unit 1 maintain our 13 plants even if we do have some disruptions from outside the 14 station.

15 A regulatory update -- basically we have submitted 16 a license amendment for fuel handler status on the unit that 17 is currently with the NRC under review. We have additional 18 tech spec revisions that we are working on right now that we 19 fAcf nrt--

will be submitting at a later date as completed by the 1 20 planning group that is onsite working on that process.

21 Our plans for decommissioning, as I said earlier, 22 that we are reviewing two options, and both of them deal 23 with the cost perspective of what is the most efficient way

]

24 to go. We have to submit those plans not only to the NRC 25 but we have to docket that plan with the Connecticut DPUC.

ANN'RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C.-20036 (202) 842-0034

32 1 We are scheduled to give an estimate to the DPUC at the 2 April hearings. We are in the process of doing that, l 3 revising the initial estimate, right now to them, and they 4 will make a determination on how much money and what funds 5 are available to us to do the complete decommissioning, so 6 it is important that we act in a prudent manner and that the 7' funds that are allocated are sufficient for us to do an i 8 effective job and do it safely. We are in the process of l 9 evaluating that right now.

10 We are also looking at the possibility of using 11 what is commonly referred to as the DOC, the Decommissioning 12 Operations Contract, similar to what was used at Maine 13 Yankee. We haven't come to any firm conclusions on that.

14 There are several proposals that we are reviewing right now 15 and we hope to be able to make a decision by the.end of the 16 second quarter of this year.

17 Again, the PSDAR, Post Shutdown Decommissioning

'18 Activities Rep 7rt will be submitted in the middle of this 19 year.

20 The major milestones.to date: The Unit was shut

~

21. down on 11-4-95. We submitted the 50.82 letter in July of 22 1998. We had our first public meeting at the White Flint 23 facility with the NRC on December 2nd and the first public 24' meeting is of course -- for the NRC is today so another 25 major milestone in the process.

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014

' Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

33 1 We have key submittals that we will be making to 2 the regulator over the next six months. We have a 3 decommissioning schedule that we are working on right now.

4 We have a team working on the station to put that'in place 5 so we'll be able to make a public presentation on it, and 6 like I say we are looking to. submit the PSDAR in the third 7 quarter of this year, hopefully.

8 Decision on the DOC is something that we want to '

9 do this year and I think it shouldn't take us until the end fir m

.10 .of the year. We should be in a pretty position to make that 11 decision by the middle of the year. I know the slide says l

12 the 12th but we are hoping to do it sooner than that. )

13 Primarily the major consideration we have is for 14 our people who are working there. People have been on that 15 unit for a long time. A lot of them have spent their entire 16 career there, 20 or more years, and a difficult decision 17 when you decide to shut a unit down like that. I have to 18 admit I am very proud of the performance of those 19 individuals. We have been.able to maintain the material 20 condition of the unit at a very high state of readiness. ,

21 People are very.much aware of what their responsibilities 22 are. They meet very high standards when it comes to 23 maintaining systems for the two operating units and we are 24 looking to be able to come up with a final plan not just for Ao A /X4/ p d b .40 p j 25 the public and the NRC but for the g q ? w . i k 5 W Cortou Af& % &Y cd

% % w A4ee /t A_- .

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.  ;

Court Reporters i 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202)'842-0034 I

34 1 So vith that said, Duke, I appreciate the 2 opportunity to give you the update.

3 MR. WHEELER: Thank you, Frank. We are the point 4 on our agenda now where we are going to open the meeting up 5 for members of the public to make comments and ask questions 6 of the NRC staff that is assembled here this evening, and 7 also any questions that they may wish.to direc oward the 8 licensee representatives that are here. Andy 2c-1 ding t:

9 the sign-up list, please.

10 MR. SHERIDAN: For the purpose of those of you who t

11 came in late, again, let's -- to try and make sure everyone 12 has an opportunity to speak, I would ask those of you to, 13 first of all, pronounce your name so that the recorder can 14 make a record of it, and, secondly, to restrict your 15 comments, if you may, to approximately three minutes, and 16 that way we can go around a second time if people have 17 follow-up questions. So with that, Rosemary, you are on 18 first.

19 MS. BASSILAKIS: Good evening, my name is Rosemary I 20 Bassilakis, I live in Haddam. I am with the Citizens 21 Awareness Network. Somebody has to go first, I guess it is 22 me tonight, and I probably will come back because I don't 23 think I can do this in three minutes.

24 Just, before I begin to touch on decommissioning, '

25 I think it is an important time to reflect on some things ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters i

1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 I

Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 C__

35 1 about Millstone 1. First of all, I think we should reflect l

2 on the fact that Millstona Point was sacrificed to three '

3 nuclear reactors. It was once a very beautiful site, it is 4 no longer that. And these power plants proved not to be too 1

5 cheap to meter, nor did they prove to be non-polluting. I 6 We should think about the millions of curies of 7 radiation that was released into the host community from 8 Millstone Unit 1 alone. Millions of curies of radiation 9 into the host community, it is a real shame. l l

l 10 We should think about the hundreds and hundreds of i l

11 shipments of low level radioactive waste that was moved to 12 Barnwell, South Carolina, and I say moved, because you 13 really don't clean up radioactivity, you simply transport it 14 to another community, and that is exactly what is going to 15 happen with this entire nuclear reactor.

16 We can also reflect on the vast amount of high 17 level radioactive waste that was generated at Millstone 18 Unit 1, high level radioactive waste for which there is no 19 permanent, safe or ethical solution at this point in time. i l

20 So I just --

I know this is a little bit off the topic, but l 21 I think it is very important to reflect on these things as 22 we go into the decommissioning mode.

23 Now, we believe, our organization believes that 24 the NRC's new rule is flawed in and of itself. I don't know 25 if people know, but the NRC came up with a new ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

36 1 decommissioning rule back-in 1996. Our organization does 2 plan on challenging this rule, first, through trying to-get i

3 a rule change, and if that doesn't work, then going back to 4 the Appellate Courts and, hopefully, they will understand i

5 our position. ]

6 And the reasons we believe that we need to 7 challenge this rule is, first of all, the public is not 8 entitled to a hearing on decommissioning until after

9. decommissioning is complete, and that is absolutely absurd, 10 to not allow the community to have any input, any real 11 input. Now, it is nice that we have an opportunity to speak

~

12 before you tonight, and I do appreciate that, but we have no 13 power. Speaking before you is much different than having a 14 .say in what goes on during decommissioning.

15 And you did mention that we can get a. hearing at 16 the end. I assume that you mean during the license 17 termination plan process. Wel], that is only if you can 18 maybe afford to hire an attorney, or if maybe you have the 19 expertise within the organization to come up with 20 contentions that.are acceptable to the Atomic Safety and 21 Licensing Board -- no easy task. It is not just a matter of 22 asking for a hearing, you have to jump through all kinds of 23 hoops, and the NRC knows this, and they should present it as 24 such right from the get-go.

25 The new rule, as you mentioned, doesn't require a ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

l 37 J i

1 detailed decommissioning plan. A post-shutdown j l

2 decommissioning activity report is all that is required.

3 You mentioned it could be anywhere from 15 to 30 pages. l I

4 Connecticut Yankee's was 13 pages. The problem with this is t

5 that it does not give the public any way of knowing what is i 6 going to go on at that reactor and how they will be {

7 impacted. It is vague, it lacks any detail for which we can i

8 understand these things, that is the problem.

9 And once it is submitted, within 90 days, they can ,

10 begin doing major dismantlement activities. The NRC doesn't l l

11 have to approve the plan, but within 90 days they can begin 12 cutting apart highly irradiated piping and shipping them on l 13 barges or trucks or railways. This is a problem.

1 14 Because decommissioning is not considered to have 15 significant potential to impact health and saf.ety, there is 1 16 less NRC oversight. Now, it is true, maybe the community 17 will be less impacted, but the workers -- the workers are 18 highly impacted because they are the ones that are going to 19 be cutting apart, stripping, dissolving, you name it, the 20 highly irradiated components over there, and for that 21 reason, we believe an NRC inspector should be on site.

22 And, lastly, as far as the rule goes, and why we 23 oppose it, the rule no longer classifies decommissioning as 24 a major federal action, therefore, licensees aren't subject 25 : to the National Environmental Policy Act standards, and we i

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025' Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 l

(202) 842-0034 l

38 1- believe this is actually illegal, and that nuclear reactors 2 do have to do site-specific Environmental Impact Statements 3 to see how decommissioning will impact the environment. So 4 we do plan on challenging this rule.

5 Are you timing?

6- .MR. SHERIDAN: We21, I think I am being very 7 liberal right now.

8 MS. BASSILAKIS: Okay. Well, I will come back. I 9 have no problem --

10 MR. SHERIDAN: Would you mind, because I think --

11 MS. BASSILAKIS: No problem.

12 MR. SHERIDAN: In fairness to everybody else.

13 MS. BASSILAKIS: I will even collect my thoughts.

14 MR. SHERIDAN: Before you leave, I would like to 15 give you a letter, if you don't mind, from -- give me that 16 mike. This is a letter from Dr. Wiles from the Connecticut 17 Radiation Monitoring Department, and I get very nervous, 18 ac'tually, as you can imagine, when I hear people talk about 19 the excess radiation than leaks from Millstone. I just want 20 to reiterate Frank Rothan's comments from earlier, I think 21 that letter outlines the extensive studies that were done on 22 all the ball fields surrounding Millstone, which,-

'23 essentially, encompasses the plant, and I would really 24 appreciate if you could read that, and I would be happy to 25 chat with you, and I am sure others would at another date.

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

39 1 Now, next on the list is Sal. Sal.

2 MR. WHEELER: Tony, one note here, if you could 3 make sure that I am provided a copy of that letter, 'aecause 4 I would like to get as complete a record of this meeting as 5 I can, and I would like to attach it to the transcript.

6 MR. SHERIDAN: I will be happy to do that.

7 Go ahead, Sal.

8 MR. aANGIAGLI: Good evening, my name is Sal 9 Mangiagli. I live in Haddam, Connecticut, a mile from the 10 Connecticut Yankee reactor, and I am with and for the 11 Citizens Awareness Network.

12 I would like to talk about this grand illusion of 13 radioactive waste being, you know, trucked off to another 14 site as if it disappears and, as if, you know, you clean up 15 a site and there is, you know, no problem with radioactive 16 waste management.

I 17 And I have a report here from the South Carolina l l

18 Department of Health and Environmental Control, Bureau of l

19 Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Division of 20 Radioactive Waste Management, and the report is tritium l 21 migration at the Barnwell low level radioactive waste l l

22 disposal facility, January 9th, 1995. As of that date, they l 23 found tritium leaking from the Barnwell site and it says 24 here that the monitor well was located on the Chem Nuclear 25 property, approximately 2,200 feet south of the disposal ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Cor.necticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

r 40 1 trenches. The tritium plume is now approximately 3,100 feet 2 long and has a width which tapers as it moves towards Mary's 3 Branch. Mary's Branch is a creek on the edge of the 4 property that this tritium is heading towards. The width is 5 generally considered to be 750 feet for calculation 6 purposes. The approximate surface area of the plume is, 7 therefore, 46 acres.

8 This is the Barnwell low radioactive waste dump 9 where Millstone -- where Northeast Utilities will be

~ 10 shipping their radioactive waste. This is unacceptable, 11 this is very low tech technology, where they are burying 12 radioactive waste in unlined, some clay-lined trenches, but, 13 for the most part, unlined trenches.

14 At Connecticut Yankee last year, a representative 15, from Chem Nuclear came up to talk about how wonderful 16 Barnwell is and the technology to deal with these low level, 17 high hazard wastes. And last year, when he was giving his 18 presentation, he talked about some leaks at the site. And 19 when I asked how much of an area the leaks have covered, he 20 told me 100 acres. So in 1995 it was 46 acres, last year it 21 is a hundred acres.

22 This is really, you know, this is an illusion that 23 you are creating, that like this waste just disappears or 24 something, that it is being taken care of and it is a farce 25 and a charade, and it is unacceptable to contaminate another ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

41 1 community -- poor, rural, 46 percent African-American. It 2 is unacceptable to contaminate another community to clean up 3 your own liability, and to just dump it on another 4 community.

5 Every low level radioactive waste dump in this 6 country has leaked. Of the six radioactive waste dumps 7 nationwide, three have been closed because of excessive 8 leakage. Barnwell is open, a hundred acres isn't excessive.

9 It seems at this time in the Atomic Age, when 10 aging reactors are shutting down prematurely, -- none of 11 them are running their 40 years, they are falling part. I i

12 They are corroding and they are dilapidating a lot faster I 13 than anyone anticipated. This is a problem that needs to be 14 addressed, but to just close these reactors and dump then on 15 another community is sickening. You should mandate SAFSTOR 16 -- not until the other reactors are closed and they can take 17 them all apart at once, but you should mandate SAFSTOR for 18 the full 50 years.

19 NRC report, right here, your own documents -- the 20 storage and entombment methods allowed for reduction in the 21 levels of radioactivity over time. NRC studies have shown 22 that after 50 years, the volume of radioactively 23 contaminated material would be reduced to one-tenth of the 24 original volume as a result of radioactive decay. What is 25 the rush, guys? A tenth of the radioactive decay -- that ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0094

rL 3 42 4

1 the workers have to deal with, that the drivers in the, 2 trucks that are going to be driving your garbage down there 3 will have to deal with, the people at the truck stops.

4 God forbid there is any accidents with these 5 shipments. The police aren't informed. The emergency 6 preparedness people aren't aware. What about a fire with 7 one of these trucks crashing on the highway and that diesel 8 fuel burning? What is going to happen to those lofted l I

9 nuclides? Who is going to deal with that? l 10 There is no rush. There is no rush at all. A 11 delay in dismantling a plant would also result in lower radI0:00A 12 exposure to the workers involved. This is NRC's document.

A 13 The only reactor sites that are using SAFSTOR are the ones 14 that are multi-complex sites, because it is cheaper for the 15 utility to dismantle those reactors all at once.

16 Connecticut Yankee is using the strip-and-ship method. It 17 is fast, it is dirty, it is cheap, and we believe it is

'18 illegal.

19 I believe that the NRC should mandate SAFSTOR. In I W6N[ 1 20 theA20 -- in the next 10 years, with deregulation of the 21 electric industry. coming, it is projected that 25 reactors 22 are going to be prematurely shutting down. The floodgates 23 of waste are just beginning to open. Tons and tons and tons 24 af radioactive garbage, plumbing, and piping, and concrete, I l

25 and liquid, and solid and -- where is it all going? You are '

-ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

n 43 1 just going to throw it in.the ground and let it leach out?

2- It is unacceptable. Mandate SAFSTOR.

3 MR. SHERIDAN: Thank you. The next person on the 4 list is Jen Gutshall.

5 [ Applause.)

6 MS. GUTSHALL: My name is Jennifer Gutshall, I.am 7 from New Haven, Connecticut. First, I would like to just 8 express my frustration with the comment that has been made 9 at least five times about the Nuclear Regulatory 10 Commission's extensive experience with decommissioning. As 11 far as I understand, this is only the second boiling water l

12 reactor to have been facing decommissioning, which has -- )

i 13 because of that set-up, has its own specific and inherent l l

14 problems, and issues. j 15 I also want to note that I did participate in the 16 preliminary hearing up at -- regarding Yankee Rowe up in 17 Greenfield, Massachusetts, and I know that in order to +wm4?

18 even have gotten that hearing, which you would think, you 19 know, it is in the public interest, the public should have 20 an ability to comment on things that vitally and directly 21 affect them, yet, I know that when Citizens Awareness 22 Network and the Nuclear Coalition on Nuclear Pollution ewRr

.n69d 23 et their contentions that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 24 responded by forcing Citizens Awareness Network to say it in 25 just the precise way, with the precise words, in the precise ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

44 l l

l' format, with the precise jargon, to be accepted.into this 2 process.

3 We are not lawyers, we don't have the money to l 4 hire lawyers, we are the public. If it takes individuals to 5 raise money, who don't have money, to raise money from other

>6 people who do not have money, to hire a lawyer to put it in 7 specific languagt so that you can understand that, when you I 8 know damn well what we are saying, it is an outrage, an 9 utter outrage.

]

10 And I-just want to leave one last question, leave 11 with one last question. How much radioactivity to do you 12 plan to leave behind a'ter you decommission? How much 13 radioactivity do you plan to leave with this .:ommunity af ter 14 it has already been dumped on for years and years and years?

15 AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: That is a quest. ion, it 16 should be answered.

17 MS. GUTSHALL: And that is a question. I am not 1

18 really sure if this --

19 AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: The NRC should be ]

l 20 answering.  !

l 21 MR. SHERIDAN: Could I suggest that there are two 22 questions? One was the -- the first one was the boiler l 23 reactors, there was a comment made that there were two 24 boiler reactors decommissioned. Is that a correct i

25 statement?

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

45 1 MR. MASNIK: Actually, I believe there are four.

U&llci ros 2 Humboldt Bay, Valeeidae Boiling Water Reactor, Big Rock nod 3 Point, and Millstone.

4. MS. GUTSHALL: Is Big Rock in -- how far is Big 5' Rock into their decommissioning?

6 MR. MASNIK: They have begun dismantlement.

7 MS. GUTSHALL: Okay.

8 MR. MASNIK: I'm sorry. I'm Mike Masnik, for the 9 transcript.

10 MR. SHERIDAN: And the'second question had to do 11 with --

12' MS. GUTSHALL: How much radioactivity do you plan l 13 to leave behind in Waterford, in this poor community that 14 has already been dumped on for years?

15 MR. MASNIK: The Commission will require the ,

I 16 licensee to submit a license termination plan, and the 3

17 current standards require the licensee to clean up the site 18 to a level where the dose to an individual is less than 25 19 millirem a year.

20 MS. GUTSHALL: Isn't it correct that the 1

21 definition of the individual, the standard individual, is a 22 200 pound male who spends eight hours on site,a day, and who 23 gardens 1-percent of the time? Now, I am not all that 24 familiar with Waterford, but I assume there are some farms 25 around here, and I assume there are some women, and I assume ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

. Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

46 1 there are some children. 1And I assume there are some ]

2 individuals with particular illnesses that -- particularly 3 Lyme Disease, which cause a certain sort of immune 4 deficiency. Wouldn't it be proper to define that standard ,

5 on how much an individual -- (1), to redefine how much I 6 radiation an individual can receive,'but, (2) redefine who 7 is receiving it to suit the most affected type of person, J

8 particularly a child?

9 MR. MASNIK: I think'we discussed thic last week, 10 but -- again, Mike Masnik. It is a 70 kilogram individual, 11 which is about 153 or 154 pounds, and it is a male.

12 MS. GUTSHALL: But it is not a pregnant woman, it-13 is not an elderly mother, it is not --

14 MR. MASNIK: No, it is not.

15 MS. GUTSHALL: -- a tiny child, it is.not a fetus.

~

16 MR. MASNIK: No , it is not.

17 MS. GUTSHALL: And it is true that these 18 individuals are most -- what is the word?

19 AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: Vulnerable.

20 MS. GUTSHALL: Vulnerable. Vulnerable. And that 21 to be really safe, to really take Waterford, the ccmmunity, 22 .its individuals, the people that live here into 23 consideration in a fair way, wouldn't it be more appropriate 24 to define that standard on the most vulnerable?

25 AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: Yes.

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

47 1 MR. BELLAMY: This is Ron Bellamy. I think what 2 Mike has expressed so far is what the FRC standard is.

3 MS. GUTSHALL: I understand the standard.

4 MR. BELLAMY: The other part of the regulation is 5 the "as low as reasonably achievable" criteria. And the 25 6 -- it is 25 millirem or as low as reasonably achievable.

7 And we will.take a look at exactly what the specific 8 situation is at Waterford or any other community in the area 9 of Millstone or any other plant to ensure that the 25 10 millirem and the "as low as reasonably achievable" criteria 11 are satisfied.

12 MS. GUTSHALL: Twenty-five millirem exposure to a 13 child, compared to.25 millirem exposure to a 200 pound male 14 is very different.

15. MR. BELLAMY: You are absolutely right. You are 16 absolutely right.

17 MS. GUTSHALL: I hope you can look at pregnant 18 mothers in this community who are concerned about the health 19 of their children and say the same thing. Thank you.

20 MR. BELLAMY: I think -- can I?

21 MR. SHERIDAN: Go ahead.

12 MR. BELLAMY: I think to put it in perspective 23 now, you have to remember that a dental X-ray is generally 24 around 20 millirem, number one. And, number two, natural i 25 background radiation in this area is about'250 millirem a ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Feporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

l

] 48 1 year. So the 25 millirem a year is l'0 percent of natural 2 background which you are joing to get whether Millstone 3: Station was here or whether Millstone Station was not here'.

4 MS. GUTSHALL: .I understand pregnant women don't 5 generally get dental X-rays.

I l 6 MR. SHERIDAN: Well, let's -- Pete.Reynolds is

]

i 7 next on the list. I J

8 MR. REYNOLDS: My name is-Pete Reynolds, I live in 9 Waterford. And I am a 210 pound male, and I was highly 10' exposed at Millstone, I used tc work there. So people here 11 do have concerns, and I want to congratulate you gentlemen

-12 on coming here, you know, considering what has been going on 13 at Waterford for the past couple of years, our dealings with 14 .the NRC, and Mr. Rothan for getting up and giving his 15 presentation, I know him quite well, probably too well.

-16' But getting down to the point of Unit 1, the first 17 thing,1 Northeast Utilities made the profit. Waterford made 18 profit by their low taxes, that's-one of the reasons I moved 19 here. So safe storage, in the light of everything else, 20 'does seem like a good idea. So it is going to take 50 21 years.

Look at this way, like Rothan said, the employees at A

22 Millstone Unit 1, you could probably keep half the people 23 there for 50 years, so that's one way of looking at it. You 24 make the profit, you got to bite the bullet somewhere along i l

25 the line. Businesses do that, they have to accept the ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036.

(*02) 842-0034 1

. . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _______ _____ 1

49 1 risks. And the last I remember, Northeast Utilities, they 2 don't have the funds to decommission Connecticut Yankee, 3 they don't have the funds that were set aside to 4 decommission Unit 1.

5 So in the next 50 years, technology is going to 6 zoom. And not only that, but maybe the U.S. Government will 7 get off their butt and do something about high level I

8 radiation storage. But it is feasible, especially with the 9 multi-plant that they have, it would be cheaper for 10 Northeast Utilities to dismantle a?' of them at once, which 11 they could start doing now, it wouli N bother me, than do 12 one at a time and incur the same expeates over a three phase 13 period, because when Unit 2 is decommissioned, and Unit 3 is 14 decommissioned, they are going to go through the same 1

15 process. So why not do it all at once. Put Unit 1 in cold 16 storage, safe cold storage.

17 That's one of the other 'hings. You talk about 18 self-assessments at the plant, that Unit 1 received the 19 company president's award for being safe the past year.

20 Well, it is easy to be safe at a plant when it is not 21 operating, producing electricity, that makes it easier.

22 They had 720,000 man-hours without a lost time accident. If 23 not performing the amount of work that you would normally do 24 .on a plant, that is probably easy to achieve. Plus, you 25 have outside contractors coming in, that will add more ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 1

L . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _

50 1 man-hours.

2 But I remember back in 1991, that there was a lost 3 -- in 1990, there was a lost time accident that never got

4. reported, and it helped Millstone achieve a million 5 man-hours. So it is hard for me to believe what comes out I

6 of Northeast Utilities about safety. And that presents a j 7 problem with decommissioning, just like the problem we had i

8 at Connect 3- Yankee, things not being done right, i

9 short-cuts being taken, improper supervision. So it all l 10 boils down to, you know, we have to believe you, what you 11 are saying, and all the people of Waterford are well aware 12 that that can't be -- just recently, the NRC hid facts from 13 their own Commission so Unit 3 ,

start up.

14 And now you a hkingapowerplantoffthe i 15, rate-base, the company is not going to be getting any 16 profits form that plant. They are going to take all kinds 17' of short-cuts to save money. Anybody out to make money is l l 18 going to do that. They are not going to -- we can't rely on 19 the NRC to do their job of regulating this, because the NRC 20 has already said, during a decommissioning, there is not so 21 much to regulate. Well, maybe that is because there is no 22 power being put out, but regulations should be adhered to 23 just as though the plant was operating, because it is just 24 as dangerous and probably, in fact, more dangerous )1 i

25 decommissioning that plant, in some phases, than with the i ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters ,

1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

_ _____________.-_._______m.__

1 51 ;

1 plant operating, because_ things get lax. People do thin ~gs 2 -- well, we are not operating. I have seen it happen just

.3 during routine shutdowns at Millstone, the attitude, well, 4 we are not running, nothing can happen.

5 Then we have the spent fuel pool where all the

]

6 .high radioactive material is going to be stored. The way 7 the systems are set up, you are going to need half the plant i i

8 just to keep these pools cool. So that goes back to a safe 9 shutdown, cold shutdown for 50 years. I think we would all 10 be better off. Maybe a lot of us here arguing the point now 11 might be dead by then, and you can do whatever the hell you- i 12 want, because that is what is going to happen anyway.

13 You are nice, you come here and you tell us the 14 facts of what is going to be done and'everything. Then, in 15 reality, what actually happens -- and we have.no say, 16 because we are only the public. We are only dumb, we don't 17 know nothing about radioactivity. I have got news for you 18 - .we probably know more about it than you do. We know how H19 to do it safely, not profitably. We talk about safety 20 versus cost.

21 I hav.e got an NRC internal report at ho a that the 22 NRC measures the significance of a safety evaluation based 23 on the cost to them, the NRC themselves, plus the cost of 24 the utility. Now, this is from your own office. And you 25 can sit up there and say you are going to do everything i

l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

52 1 safely, not matter what the_ cost, and you can't afford the 2 cost of safety. That is why they shut down Unit 1, it would 3 cost them too much to bring it up to par the way it should 4 have been operated for the past 25 years.

5 So it is hard to believe exactly what you 6 gentlemen are trying to do. I live in Waterford, and I am 7 going to be watching you. And there's means besides courts 8 and I am pretty sure we can raise the money if we have to, 9 to take care of the problem. So don't try to fool us, don't 10 try to bullshit us. Be straight and do it right. That's 11 all.

12 MR. SHERIDAN: Thank you.

13 (Applause.]

14 MR. SHERIDAN: Phalis Buildmore. Is Phalis 15 Buildmore --

16 MR. BUILDMORE: Oh, that's Phalis.

17 MR. SHEPTDAN: Phalis 18 MR. BU_aDMORE: Phalis Buildmore.

19 MR.'SHERIDAN: Are you Phalis?

20 MR. BUILD $ ORE: Yes, I am Phalis.

21 MR. SHERIDAN: Please come forward.

22 MR. BUILDMORE: Thank you. You don't mind.if I 23 expose myself, do you?

24 MR, SHERIDAN: Well --

25 MR. BUILDMORE: Just a little. .

ANN RILEY-& ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

g ,tv. ' 53 1 MR. SHERIDAN: Try and not get excited. d 2 MR. BUILDMORE: A little exposure. The NRC has 3 been talking about exposure all night. And you don't mind 4

MAoW if I turn my derriere to you guys, because that is -what I 5 feel for you.

6 But people, I want to talk to you. My name is-7 Phalis Buildr.iore, and I am a clown. And I have been 8 following this dog-and-pony show all over New England, and 9 they go everywhere. They make all kinds of promises in 10 cryptic language that no one can understand. They say they 11 are going to do this, and they are going to do that. And 12 this and that. And that and this. And when it comes down 13 to it, they are going to just leave you all with a mess -- a 14 big mess. And you won't see it, you won't feel it, you 15 won't sme]l it, but you all be dying from it.

16 So I would like to do -- well, they 9 as around 17 doing their pony show, their dog-and-pony show, and it is a 18 drama, everyone is sad after they leave and distraught 19 because it is so heartfelt and so painful to listen to their 20 stuff.

21 So I would like to give you a little comic relief, l

22 and I would like to give you a little cabaret. And I would 23 like to encourage you all, the next time they come down to 24 sock it to them. So, if you don't mind, I would like to 25 give you my poem now.

ANN RILEY & ASCOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

54 1 They found some funny rocks out on the Colorado 2 Flats, and they thought they would make some money, so they I

3 hired some bureaucrats. Now, they say it is what we need to '

4 keep us free from all our care, and we have atomic power 5 -- radiation everywhere. i 6 Well, it is in the food, and it is in the air, and l

7 it is in the milk kids drink. It is in the snow at 31wv6' 1 8 Christmas and it is in the kitchen sink. And down below the 9 continent there's tons of it on store, and all we have to do '

10 is keep it safe for a million years or more.

11 Now,, it is the rage in Russia, in China and in 12 France, and every little dictator wants to get their power 13 chance. And they will breed it right along until there's 14 tons on it on store, and they will put it in their missiles 15 and they will have themselves a war.

16 Well, when we finally -- now, here's to all the 17 great men who have brought it right along, in all their war 18 and glory and in business, right or wrong. And when we 19 finally meet them, in the mansion in the sky, we can thank 20 them very kindly for kissing our ass goodbye.

21 You can't see it, you can't feel it, you can't 22 stash it in the hall. You can't serve it up for dinner, it 23 won't answer when you call. You can't flush it down the 24 toilet, and, my friends, this is no lie, you will give it 25 life and money but you will never make it die. Thank you.

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) S42-0034

55 1- [ Applause.]

2 MR. SHERIDAN: Joe Besade. Where's Joe? You have 3 a hard act to follow, Joe.

4 AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: Poor Joe.

l 5 MR. .SHERIDAN: Joe is not with us. We will' skip )l 6 over Joe for a minute and we go to Joe Amarello. I 7 AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: Joe Besade is here.

8 MR. SHERIDAN: Hey, Joe, come on, you are on next. i 9 AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: You can do it, Joe.

10 MR. BESADE: My name is Joe Besade and I am from 11 Waterford, Connecticut, a member of the CRC, also, the 12 newest chapter of Fish Unlimited.

13 One of the questions I have is the letter from the 14 DEP that our First Selectman mentioned earlier in his l

15 putting in for -- documentation, a long kind of transcript. I 16 What type of sampling was done? Was it core bored and how 17 deep?

18 MR. SHERIDAN: I will give you' a copy of t he 19 letter, Joe.

20 MR. BESADE: Okay.

21 MR. SHERIDAN: It is -- there were three types of.

22 samplings, and someone could correct me if I am wrong here, 23 there was a below ground, surface level and waste level.

24 MR. BESADE: Okay. And the below ground would be 25 how deep, and how was it taken? I have names of commercial ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

1 l

56 1 companies that I will take and --

2 MR. SHERIDAN: I don't know how far down, but I 3 can give you a copy of the letter tomorrow, I would be happy

'4 to give it to you, 5 MR. BESADE: That will be fine. Okay. My next 6 question is, after two years, I personally would like to 7 know who ' Jill be financially. responsible for the dismantling 8 and cleanup of Millstone site if NU Utilities and their 9 partners find it more profitable to go belly-up? Does 10 anybody care to answer it at this time?

11 MR. MASNIK: Mike Masnik from the NRC. We have 12 had a lot of discussions over this many years ago when 13 General Public. Utilities had an accident at Three Mile 14 Island. But, basically,-if Northeast Utilities should go 15 into bankruptcy, there would be a proceedings and it is 16 probably likely that the judge would honor the requirements 17 of public health and safety before other factors, so that 18 the money for decommissioning would be preserved.

19 The money in the decommissioning trust fund, we 20 are reasonably certain, would also be preserved for the 21' cleanup. Now, if there is insufficient funds in the 22 utility's assets, then the plant could be placed into 23 storage for-some period of time, or, ultimately, if there is 24- a' question of public health and safety, it would be the

25. responsibility of the federal government to step in and ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

l 57 1- safeguard the public.

2 MR. BESADE: By the federal government, do you j 3 mean the NRC or the OIG who is going.to keep on the NRC? I 4 .Right-now I don't have much faith in the NRC. I have been 5L to Washington, D.C. twice'and with.the -- watching local 6 politicians, our First Selectman and our Governor come over 7 to Millstone three.yearl ago and say that it was perfectly 8: . safe and none of us had anything to worry about it. It-9 seems as though the whistle-blowers, who haven't got any 10 recognition, that they really deserre, I guess they were 11 quite right and, as you know now, they have spent over a 12 billion dollars on their errors, what should have been done 13 a long time ago.

'14 The part that bothers me is when the NRC makes a 15 statement, don't you think the Northeast has suffered enough 16 financially? I am not interested, and I am not happy to 17 hear'the NRC's worry about their financial background. The 18 NRC's position is to look out for us small pecple and our 19' well-being. Thank you.

20 [ Applause.]'

21 MR. SHERIDAN: Thank you. The next person on the 22 list is Joe Amarello.

23' MR. AMARELLO: Good evening, my name is Joe 24 Amarello, I-am an instructor at Northeast Utilities in the

25 . Nuclear Training Department. I have been there for ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202). 842-0034 ,

l...

58 1 approximately two yearr, and I am speaking for myself. I 2 just wanted to state thac safety is my first priority every 3 day at work, and specifically with respect to Millstone 4 Station Unit 1, any training that I provide in support of 5 Unit 1, I will stress safety in all aspects of the 6 decommissioning effort. That's it.

7 [ Applause.]

8 MR. SHERIDAN: Thank you. We have completed the 9 list that we were provided. Are there any other people who 10 have not signed up, that would like to speak? This lady and 11 then, Mark, you will be after her.

12 MS. WINSLOW: I guess I have a lot of questions.

13 already been answered, but --

Some of them ha,vp W#& ELE /2 14 MR. SttRftTDMN: Excuse me.

15 MS. WINSLOW: My name is G(<21f 3 Winslow, and I am 16 a resident of W e .

17 MR . GHEMBAN : Excuse me. And since we don't h6e 18 your name on the sign-up list, just so that we get the 19 transcript accurate, would you please spell your last name?

20 MS. WI SLOW: Winslow, W-i-n-s-1-o-w.

21 l Udllf/Z MR. GHEMBAN: Tha.k you.

22 MS. WINSLOW: And the first name is Geralyn, 23 because t.lat is,pnusual name.

G-e-r-a-1-y-n.

WhhDC L&$.

24 MR. SHEMBRN: Thank you.

25 MS WINSLOW: Okay. So the decision hasn't been ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036.

(202) 842-0034

p.

59 1 made about what they are going to do with Millstone 1 yet,

2. as far as the immediate future. It could be a while, it 3 could be right away. Is that the feeling I am getting here i 4 tonight? No decision'has been made yet?

5 h'MN/$

MR. MEMBbHR: Our regulations allow the licensee 6 to either dismantle the plant immediately or put it into 7 'SAFSTOR for up to 60' years, in other words, complete'the 8 process within 60 years, or a combination of either. The 9 licensee has not indicated to us which of those two options 10 they will plan to do, and they are required by the 11 regulation to let us know within two years of 12 decommissioning.

L3 MS. WINSLOW: Okay. Because I had read in the 14 paper that they were going to let it sit for a while, and 15 that was the feeling I got before I came to this meeting 16 tonight, but now I hear that the choice hasn't been made 17 yet.

18- What about the components of the plant itself, 19 what do they do with that? When they take it apart, what do 20 they do with it?

21 NON/K MR.4EHHHMHtr Well, when they dismantle'the plant, 22 based on our experience at other facilities, they either try 23 to decontaminate the components or parts, or pipes. Or, if i

24 they are unable to decontaminate, in other words, remove the 25 radiation from the material, then they have to dispose of ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut. Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

i l

1 60 1 that material off-site, and that would be the material.that 2 would be sent down -- in the case of Northeast, it would be 3 sent down to Barnwell.

1 4 MS. WINSLOW: Would that be considered high level 5 or low level waste, or is it a cocaination of each? )

M/hSNI}<

6 MR WHEELER < Well, you have to analyze the CFhbiMmndog 7 _cO=hinaLica.

8 MS. WINSLOW: Depending on the situation?

/1kSA /d

/

9 MR . +HHHHHHt : It depends on the situation.

10 MS. WINSLOW: Okay. Because I was curious about 11 ' hat.

. And what about the high level waste, will it remain 12 on-site?

ffASN/K 13 MR. MHEELER: Yes, until DOE has a permanent 14 repository. However, there are some other options. The 15 licensee might choose to put it in an interim storage 16 facility. There is some discussion of a national interim 17 repository.

'18 MS, WINSLOW: I know all about that. I am just 19 curious about, at Waterford, will it stay in the spent fuel 20 pool?

/1ASAf/A 21 MR. WHEBbER- It depends what the licensee chooses 22 to do. They can keep it in the spent fuel pool for 40 23 years, or 30 years, or they could build dry storage and keep 24 it on-site in a dry storage facility, or they could ship it 25 to an interim facility if one was available. And if DOE --

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036

.(202) 842-0034

)

i 61  ;

~

i 1 MS. WINSLOW: But that hasn't been decided.yet? l MRSMsK 2 MR. h"! CELER : No , it has not.

I 3 MS. WINSLOW: Okay.

l MRSN/M I 4 MR. NP.EELE!' . And if DOE licensed the high level l 5 repository, they would be able to ship it to that as well, i

{

6 MS. WINSLOW: Okay. How much high level waste is 7 there associated with Millstone Unit 1, in metric tons?

8 Because at one time I had heard some talk of measuring it in 9 metric tons. Does anybody have a number on that? How much 10 high level radioactive waste is being stored in the Unit i 11 fu 1 col, does an body know? r h6 h'RS/VM l c06 'Q}q/,

J:3o',.<d)Pwd aff>sadaspcuckhkdAL W . . YY#gb Ab ,

Mo/h 12 ,,,One hc' red one Millstones piled up on top of each 13 other. That's a lot of radioactive waste. What are we 14 going to do with it all?

-15 Right now some of it goes to Barnwell, South i

16 Carolina, and it is leaking there. They don't want it 17 there. People in Texas don't want it, because I've spoken 18 and met with some of them. People in Maine decided they 19 didn't want it in any of their communities, so they're not l 20- going to keep any of it there. Nevada doesn't want it, 21 although the Government wants to put it there. So nobody 22 wants it.

Y 23 -And I don't want to see Waterfor waste 24 contaminate any of those communities, so I'm in favor of 25 keeping it in Waterford, which sounds.-- although strange h&f& ' ks ) Y dA h . M26 p kLyANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

62 1 thing, I live here, but I would rather see it remain where 2 it was' created. And it just boggles my mind to think of 100 3 nuclear plants being dismantled and put somewhere in storage 4 with no real assurance of safety there. And I just -- when 5 I think of that, it drives me crazy, and then I think wel],

l 6 why are we still making it if we don't know what to do with j i

7 it? So my -- the only thing I could think of was maybe we 1

8 could just docide not to make it anymore, and then we could i

\

9 put our heads together for a future for our children and our 10 planet.

11 Thank you.

12 MR. SHERIDAN: Mark, you're on. gt M 8p ,

13 MR. HOLLOWAY: Mark Holloway, Waterford, 14 Connecticut.

15 I didn't intend on speaking tonight or asking any 16 questions, but some things that were brought up really 17 concern me.

18 The gentleman mentioned a level as low as 19 reasonably ach'ievable, and this was in reference to the 20 25-rem limit. Does'this mean --

l 21 MR. BELLAMY: The answer is yes, and it's 25 22 millirem, not 25 rem.  !

23 MR. HOLLOWAY: Millirem. Okay.

24 MR. BELLAMY: There's a factor of 1,000 difference 25 there.

l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. )

Court Reporters 1 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

y 63 1 HMR.. HOLLOWAY: Yes, you're right.

2 MR. BELLAMY: 25 millirem.

'3 MR.'HOLLOWAY: 25 millirem. You're right.

4 MR. BELLAMY: Thank you.

'S MR.'HOLLOWAY: That's a big difference. q 6 MR. BELLAMY: Yes, it is.

7 MR..HOLLOWAY: Now as low as reasonably 8 achievable, what is our numbers'for that? Is there any sort 9 of a quantifier for that?

10 MR. BELLAMY: I.would have to say there's no 11 quantifiable way to' define as low as reasonably achievable.

12 It's.taking the situation that you have and seeing if 13 there's any reasonable way to reduce the dose any further.

14 It's a principle that is used daily in hundreds of 15 -activities at this station and every other station in the 16 country.

17 MR. HOLLOWAY: So are we saying that the: level

  • /K .

~

18 could exceed the 25 - "'~'

j 19 MR. BELLAMY: No.

1 20 MR. HOLLOWAY:

Millirem?

21. MR. BELLAMY: We are not. We are saying that you

~

-22 first have to satisfy the 25 millirem per year. Then we're-23_ saying.that maybe that's not good enough, and if there is a 24 way to reasonably. reduce that number, they would have to 25 . reduce that number further.

I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW,. Suite 1014

. Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

M G4 1 .

MR. HOLLOWAY: Okay. So that --

2 MR. BELLAMY: .And to get there --

3 MR. HOLLOWAY: That is your top -- that is your L4 . top level.

5' MR. BELLAMY: Correct.

6 .MR. HOLLOWAY: Okay. Good. I'm glad to hear

-7 that --

8 MR. BELLAMY: Correct.

9 MR. HOLLOWAY: There's sometimes a problem in what 10 I'look at as being a somewhat subjective measurement, 11- qualities, and --

12 MR. BELLAMY: I would agree as low.as reasonably 13 Lachievable is a subjective criteria, yes. But again the 25 14' millirem per year is what you start with, and then you move 15 ' downward from that.

16' MR. HOLLOWAY: Okay. That sounds a lot better 17 than a wide-open criteria'that is based upon someone's idea 18 .of what can be achieved.

19 The area of responsibility in terms of high-level 20 waste,.there's been a lot of talk about who should have it, 21; who's responsible for it. Apparently the DOE is by. law 22 responsible for'it, but since'the DOE does not have an 23 . acceptable site, even though they're trying to get Yucca 24 LMountain approved, why don't we even consider -- and I'll-25 bet you guys _right now whatever you want to bet that ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025: Connecticut Avenue,.NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

65 1 Northeast Utilities does not go with the SAFSTOR method for 2 Millstone 1. That didn't happen at CY, and I don't think 3 it's going to happen here.

4 And, you know, I'm not really sure why, except 5 that several people have said there's a cost measure. It is 6 more expensive. And it's also going to keep a facility 7 open. Another gentleman said well, it keeps people working.

8 But I guess that really doesn't matter. What really matters i 9 is get rid of it quick.

10 MR. MASNIK: You know, there are some advantages 11 to immediate decontamination. There are advantages of both, 12 obviously. I mean, SAFSTOR clearly you reduce the volume 13 and you reduce the exposure to the work force. But there i

14 are some values to DECON. You have an experienced work )

15 force now that knows the plant. In 50 years that won't be 16 the case.A The Agency has put a lot of stock into that.

17 Another thing that we're concerned about is -- and 18 we have to be realistic here -- once the facility is no 19 longer generating money, there is not a lot of incentive for 20 the licensee to. spend a lot of money on the facility. And 21 one of the things we're concerned about in storing these 22 facilities for quite a few years is degradation of the 23 barriers to the environment. ~You know, we're very sensitive 24 to that. So those two things I think are significant in our 25 mind as far as the DECON is concerned.

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

66 1 Now in 1988 the Commission did.an environmental 2 impact' statement, what we call a generic environmental ,

3 impact statement, where we looked at a number of options, 4 and the two that were clearly acceptable for plants were the.

5 DECON and the SAFSTOR options. And we decided that either i 6 of those or a combination of those were acceptable. It was 7 up to the licensee to make the decision. And we've got.

8 experience in both, and there are pros and cons for both.

9 MR. HOLLOWAY: But there have been billions of 10 dollars that have been set aside for high-level waste 11 storage, and some of that money has already been spent on 12 the Yucca Mountain facility. So what would be the 13 problem -- I realize the utility can't bear the whole burden 14 of SAFSTOR throughout the country at particular plants --

15 what would be the big problem in using those moneys for that 16 method considering it is as people have expressed probably 17 the safest method that can be utilized?

18 MR. MASNIK: That's a decision that's way above 19 me. I understand your point.

20 MR. HOLLOWAY: I'm talking about responsibility, 21 though.

22 MR. MASNIK: Would they be able to give that money 23 back to the utilities to build an onsite repository?

24 MR. HOLLOWAY: The utility might not even have 25 that site anymore. It might become a U.S.

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

l

)

I 67 1 Government-sanctioned high-level waste site with SAFSTOR 2 capability. I mean, I guess I don't understand why that we l 1

3 have funds for this purpose that are not being utilized for

~4 this purpose. t 5 MR. MASNIK: Well, the Department of Energy is 1

6 having a difficult time licensing Yucca Mountain, and 7 -that's -- .

8 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, I'm not even talking about 9 Yu Mountain. We have 105 plants in the U.S. that could 10 be high-level waste facilities with the proper use of 11 manpower, responsibility,.and funds.

12 MR. 8eAl%

MACNIm. I don't think that option is out the 1 l

13 window. I can tell you that Maine Yankee is seriously 14 pursuing what's called'an independent spent-fuel storage 15' facility onsite for specifically that purpose. They have an 16 advisory committee that I attend their meetings j 17 approximately. monthly to find out what's going on, and that 18 is right.on the top of their consideration priority list, 19 and Maine-Yankee will foot the entire bill for that 20' -facility. ,

1 21 MR. HOLLOWAY: Would this be something that the 22 NRC would encourage? l 23 MR. BELLAMY: Encourage is a hard term for us to

24 use. .We will encourage the licensees -- we will encourage 25 the licensees to do whatever is necessary to protect public l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036

-(202)-842-0034

i 68 1 health and safety. If they can convince us that an ,

2 independent-spent-fuel storage facility is the best way to 3 protect public health and safety, we would support that.

4 I don't like the word " encourage," and I won't use 5 the word " encourage." If a licensee comes in and says we 6 think that the best way to protect public health and safety 7 is to completely decontaminate, decommission, and dismantle 8 this facility today and they can do~it in a manner that 9 protects public health and safety, we would support.that 10 decision.

11 MR. HOLLOWAY: So you're basing it on you have --

12 you're saying to the utility you have these two options, 13 demonstrate to us which option that can be used most 14 effectively in this case. You don't have a preferred 15, method.

16 MR. BELLAMY: Correct. That's correct.

17' MR. HOLLOWAY: There's nothing that'you say this 18 is the way we want to go on this.

19 MR. BELLAMY: That's correct.

20 MR. HOLLOWAY: Okay.

21- MR. BELLAMY: I also -- you know, there have been 22 a lot of comments and discussions tonight on SAFSTOR versus 23 DECON. .There are also significant differences in the 24 benefits'as to whether there are additional operating 25- facilities and reactors at that site. So Haddam Neck is an ANN RILEY &~ ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025' Connecticut Avenue, NW,.. Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036-(202) 842-0034 4

69 1 entirely different situation. If Haddam Neck decided that 2 they wanted to go to a SAFSTOR situation, we would have to 3 take a very hard look at how they're going to secure that 4 facility over the next X years until they d'ecide that 5 SAFSTOR is not appropriate. Whereas here at the Millstone 6 Point you will have a continued very substantial security 7 force, guard force, health physics department, and those 8 sort of ancillary activities to support the work. So you 9 have to look at each situation differently, and there's a 10 significant difference in the benefits and advantages of 11 DECON versus SAFSTOR for the different types of reactors.

12 MR. HOLLOWAY: Because you have operating reactors 13 and you'll be able to maintain an operating plant license 14 within the boundaries of that facility.

15 MR. BELLAMY: I would characterize it more as you 16 have -- you have adequately trained staff there to provide 17 the support facilities for the reactor that might go into 18 SAFSTOR such as the situation at Indian Point 1, TMI-2, and 19 Peach Bottom 1.

20 MR. HOLLOWAY: Thank you.

21 MR. SHERIDAN: Paul and then -- well, Evan, go 22 ahead, and then Paul.

23 M00s.A. Aco Y MR. WO9heOPP:

4)bf I'm Evan 'fecl;ctt . I cochair the 24 Nuclear Energy Advisory Council. I'm speaking for myself, 25 just so you know that.

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 102*- Ponnecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 i

70 1 And'I just want to emphasize a couple of things 2 that I heard. I had not planned on speaking. I think it 3 was Rosemary here brought up the item about a hearing after 4 decommissioning is done is not a hearing. And they' talked 5 about'taking legal action. I think it would be a lot easier 6 if the NRC took a look at that and schedaled hearings ht the 7 proper time.

8 [ Applause.]

9 AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: Yes. Thank you.

10 MR. WOObEO995 I think also that I should say that 11 I've been in the nuclear field since 1953, and when someone 12 says they have extensive experience in decommissioning, I

.13 don't.think that's true. We're all learning an awful lot.

14 One of the concerns I have is that the BWR is a direct-cycle 15 unit, and it gives off more radiation than the systems in a 16 pressurized water reactor. And I wonder if NRC has looked 17 atL the differences between BWR and PWR and made sona "18- , decisions of what actions they might take.

19 MR. MASNIK: We did a series -- Mike Masnik

-2 0 ' again -- we did a series of studies back in the eighties, 21 and some of those studies are continued -- actually I

22 continued into the nineties -- where we locked at e '

23 reference BWR and a reference PWR, and the study actually 24 went_through-the dismantlement, it looked at discrete work l

. I 25 packages, it looked at discrete components, and it made some ]

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 l Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 p

71 1 predictions about what kind of exposure the work force would 2 get, what kind of costs would be incurred.

3 I'm happy to say that our experience to date, at 4 least at the PWR facilities, has been that the rates of 5 exposure are significantly lower than what we predicted. So 6 it seems like the industry is doing a better job at taking 7 the plants apart than we had predicted.

8

6) &

MR. wOOLCCTT: Yes, I think that was my point. I 9 think as we get experience, there are different ways we can 10 clean these things up so it's more usable from the l l

11 standpoint of where you want to put it and that type of  !

12 thing.

13 And the other one, I know Rosemary won't like 14 this, but she has to listen to me every once in a while l 1

15 anyway, and I hope and pray that the DOE and all the suits I 16 will cause the DOE to do something to make a centralized 17 interim storage facility so we have one place to take care 18 of the high-level nuclear waste. I recognize the problem of 19 low-level, but high-level has got to go in one spot. And I i 20 would say that whoever talked to the people in Nevada didn't 21 talk to the same people I talked to in Nevada, because the 22 people in Nevada say they want it. They'd like to have it.

23 Thank you.

24 MR. SHERIDAN: Paul?

25 MR. BLANCH: My name is Paul Blanch. I'm from ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court-Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

a. __.

l 72 1 West Hartford, Connecticut. I'm a consultant to Northeast 2 Utilities, but I'm here speaking for myself.

About a year ago I attended a meeting at Yankee I 3

4 Rowe, and it was a meeting similar to this. And I wasn't 5 going to speak tonight, but a point was made, and it's 6 bothersome to me. I reviewed the transcript of that Yankee  !

l 7 Rowe meeting a few months ago, and the Nuclear Regulatory 8 Commission at that time promised me an answer in writing to 9 my questions, and here we are a little over a year later, 10 and I still haven't gotten any response from the NRC.

11 But the basic question was that Yankee Rowe stated 12 that their site, returning it to greenfield, was going to be ,

l 13 for unrestricted use, and I ran the numbers, and they were 14 going to sa.y -- they said that no area three feet above the 15 ground woult be more than 10 microrad per hour,.which if you 16 work that out to 8,760 hours0.0088 days <br />0.211 hours <br />0.00126 weeks <br />2.8918e-4 months <br /> a year,'that turns out to be 87 17 millirem per year. And I asked how that equated to 25 18 millirem a' year, which was their criteria. What I've 19 heard -- and by the way, that was for unrestricted, which is 20 defined as living there 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> a day, 365 days a year, and j 21 potential,1y camping out and sleeping on the ground.

22 I think what I heard tonight by one lady was that 23 you've now changed the definition of unrestricted access to 24' be only eight hours a day? Is that what I heard?

25 AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: Yes, you heard that.

I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

73 1 MR. MASNIK: I don't-believe we said eight hours a 2 C?)

day. $

3 AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: The greenfield.you did.

A 4 MR. SHERIDAN: Could you give these folks a chance 5 to respond, please?

6. AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: Double-talk, buddy.

]

h/ kin //< l 7 MR.H&ebbAMY: The estimate is based on the average '

8 dose to a member of the critical group, and there are 9 certain assumptions made on the amount of time that this 10 individual spends on the site. Nobody, or very few people, 11- spend their entire 365 days a year on the ground. Now there i

12 .are people, you know, you move, you leave the location, and

13. the calculation is done assuming that.the individual instead 14 of taking the worst-case condition takes an average 15 condition for the individual.

?

16 MR. BLANCH: Well, that is completely contrary to 17 what we were told. And if you look at the transcript at the 18 Yankee Rowe meeting, you'll clearly see it was based on 19 8,760 hours0.0088 days <br />0.211 hours <br />0.00126 weeks <br />2.8918e-4 months <br /> a year.

20- AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: He was there.

21 MR. BLANCH: And I would also like to formally 22 request that you review that transcript, and I would like a 23 response in writing from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 24 to that.

25 MR. MASNIK: Paul, we will give you --

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

l 74 1 MR. BLANCH: Because I think it's important.

2 Were talking -- and it doesn't matter to me, 15 millirem 3' doesn't hurt in my mind, 25, you know, I'm not worried about 4 that. But when you go from 25 to 87 and then it's just by 5 changing a little bit of words to the average individual, 6 that's bothersome. And sometimes people could actually camp 7- out on these sites. Who knows how they're going to be used.

8 But if it's unrestricted, it's got to be for the 8,760 9 hours, whatever it is.

10 The second question or statement I'd like to make 11- is there's a lot of confusion as to what regulations apply

.12 during decommissioning. We' re still applying the rules ' of 13 Part 50, which is for an operating nuclear powerplant. We 14 know that this is no longer an operating nuclear powerplant.

15 And I've actually talked to some of the Commis.'ioners and 16 the EDO about this particular topic. And we need -- we, the 17 industry, and the NRC needs more clarification as to what 18 rules apply during the decommissioning.

19 For instance, there are a lot of areas of Part 50 20 that do apply and do not apply. There arc areas of various 21 appendices to Part 50 like Appendix A. What applies as far 22 as Appendix A in the general design criteria? Appendix B, 23 quality assurance requirements. What quality assurance 24 requirements? And I'm not saying you need to increase when 25 we're decreasing, it's just that they need to be defined.

ANN RILEY &-ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014

' Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

75 1 Utilities need to know what they're doing. Maine 2 Yankee is doing it differently than Connecticut Yankee. I 3 . understand Maine Yankee essentially is doing it without an 4 Appendix B program. I'm not saying whether that's right or 5 wrong. It's just got to be defined so that the utilities 6 and the public know what is going on. And I think that has 7 to be done very quickly, before the Millstone 8 decommissioning starts, so that everyone knows what rules 9 ~are being played by. I'm not asking you to respond to that, 10 but it's just a statement right now.

11 Thank you.

12 (Applause.]

13 MR. MASNIK: Paul, we will provide you with a 14 written response to your question.

15 MR. BLANCH: )

16 MR. SHERIDAN:

0%ddThankw ary?

you.b 0-f- ) '

17 MS. KUHN: Thank you for being here. I just have

'18 a couple of quick questions, or comments too.

19 I would suggest that -- oh, I'm scrry, Mary Kuhn, 20 K-u-h-n, RC from Waterford -- Quaker Hill, actually.

21 In your presentations I understood also that or as 22 low as reasonably achievable, what I understood you to say 23 was 25 millirems a year or as low as reasonably achievable, 24 which sounded like a big loophole to me. And I think that 25 if you have any printed material, it would be-well to

@ He.MsMIK! % .

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

76 1 clarify that, because it was very confusing.

2 MR. BELLAMY: I'm sorry, could you state -- could 3 you tell me again what the confusion is?

4 MS. KUHN: Well, you say 25 millirems a year or as 5 low as reasonably achievable.

6 MR. BELLAMY: I beg your pardon. If'I said or, I i

7 misspoke -- it's "and."

l 8 MS. KUHN: Um-hum.

1 l

9 MR. BELLAMY: It's 25 millirem per year and as low 10 as reasonably achievable. It is not an "or" statement, it 11 is an "and" statement. The licensee bust satisfy both 12 criteria independently.

13 MS. KUHN: Um-hum.

14 MR. BELLAMY: So if I stated "or," I misspoke and

'15 I misled you. But I meant to say "and."

16 MS. KUHN: Um-hum.

17 MR. BELLAMY: They have to satisfy both.

18 MS. KUHN: Or you could say or as low as 19 reasonably achievable below --

20 MR. BELLAMY: Great. Thank you.

21 MS. KUHN: 25 millirems a year.

l 22 MR. BELLAMY: Great. j 23 ,

MS. KUHN: Yes. The spent fuel pool comes under 24 the DOE? Is that correct? Will that be still where it is 25 now?

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

77 l' MR. BELLAMY: The answer is no. The spent fuel 2- pool remains-un' der NRC regulatory jurisdiction here at the 3 site.

4 MS. KUHN: Um-hum, i

K 5 MR. BELLAMY: The Department of Energy is required 6 by law to generate and have a spent-fuel repository.

7 MS. KUHN: Oh, I see.

8 MR. BELLAMY: Offsite, and the facility that 9 you've heard mentioned is. Yucca Mountain.

10 MS. KUHN: Um-hum. Do you have any concerns about 11 this spent-fuel pool? Well, it's above ground now. Is t"tt 12 correct?

13 MR. BELLAMY: The answer is yes, it's above 14 ground. We inspected it today, this afternoon. We walked 15 away with no concerns that said I have to do anything about 16 it or any of the NRC staff has to do anything about it 17 today. We took a look to ensure that there was a 18 leak-detection system. So it's a difficult question to ask, 19 do you have any concerns. We have a concern about a 20 leak-collection system to make sure that if there is a leak 21 it can be detected. But it's not a significant concern.

I 22 l MS. KUHN: I feel a little uneasy with that 23 spent-fuel pool myself because I understand that the 24 containment of the reactor was so strong that it could take 25 an airplane c[ ashing into it. And then I always thought ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

78 1 that well, what if it didn't crash into the reactor, what if h>ould 2 it crashed into the spent-fuel pool, what might happen to 3 that? And I once asked an NRC person, and they said well, 4- that would be the worst possible thing, because you would 5 lose your coolant. And I take it you would lose your

6 coolant reasonably quickly, too, or at least you could. So l

7 I have always felt a little uneasy with that there.

8 MR. MASNIK: The spent-fuel pool is in the  !

I i 9 containment at Millstone 1. '

l 10 MS. KUHN: Um-hum.

11 MR. MASNIK: Okay? So it's inside that structure.

12 MS. KUHN: The same containment that the reactor's j 13 in?

l 14 AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: Don't lie to her. It's not 15, inside. It's got a regular roof over the top of it just 16 like we've got here. It's not in containment.

17 MR. BELLAMY: It's inside the reactor building.

18 It is not inside the same structure that the -- the 1

19 containment vessel and the reactor have a separate structure 20 inside the reactor building. The spent-fuel pool is in the 21 reactor building. That's a correct clarification.

22 MS. KUHN: Thank you. I also understood from an 23 NRC person that the billions of dollars that were set aside 24 for the permanent storage are no longer available, that they 25 had been -- I think one gentleman said it was put to use to ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1925 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034 c_________________________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

f.

I 79 1 decrease the budget deficit or something like that. .That's 2 just my understanding. I

-3 MR. SHERIDAN: That's correct.

4 MS. KUHN: That is correct. The other point that j 5 I would like to make hopefully that the NU is a little 6 bit -- has their priorities a little bit more in order than 7 .you think they do, because I notice that you said that if l

l 8 the high-level radioactive waste is kept on' site, then the 9 company doesn't -- but the plant'is closed, decommissioned, l

10 it doesn't have a lot of incentive for the company to spend 11 money. And I would like to think that safety is the first 12 incentive of this company, but I guess the NRC doesn't 13 necessarily think so. I just wanted to make that comment. i 14 Thank you very much.

15 [ Applause.]

16 MR. SHERIDAN: Are we all set with first-time 17 speakers?

18 MR. MANGIAGLI: I have a couple of comments I'd 19 like to make. You mentioned one of the very good reasons 20 for the rapid dismantlement of the reactors, the experienced 21 work force that's on site that is familiar with the reactor, 22 so therefore they're best suited to take it apart. But yet 23 Siemens has done the chemical decontamination at Connecticut 24 Yankee,'and Connecticut Yankee is taking bids from I

25 contractors to rip the steam generators out, to rip the ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washia.gton, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

i 80 1 vessel out, the pressurizer, to do all this work. They're 2 looking to take the lowest bid they can get. Maine Yankee 3 has done the same thing. Maine Yankee has used contractors.

4- So this thing about th'e experienced work force, what happens 5 to the experienced work force, totally shafted for 6 lower-bidding contractors.

7 So, you know, this issue of the experienced work 8 force being on site is pretty weak when they're being laid 9 off.

10 MR. MASNIK: What we find at most plants is that 11 there's a significant reduction in the number of full-time 12 personnel, that it gets down to about 150 to 200 13 individuals, and these are the people that the licensee 14 maintains on site during the DECON activity. Now it is true 15 that they go out and contract f v rious evolutions and 16 operations, for example, full-6& edged DECON. Or if they're 17 removing major components, they go out and they hire a heavy 18 lift operator. But that work is supervised and overseen by 19 the utility personnel.

20 MR. .MANGIAGLI: Something I'd like to say on the 21 Yucca Mountain issue, the high-level waste issue, Mr.

22 Sheridan, you've worked very hard to see.that the interim 23 storage bill gets passed, the mobile Chernobyl bill. And 24 just to remind everybody that's thinking that Yucca Mountain I 25- is like this wonderful thing that's going to save us all i

1 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

1 I: '81

j. '1- from.our high-level waste, it'll only hold a-third of the 2 high-level' waste that we will be generating, that we need to-3 .be building'two more Yucca Mountains like right now, because 4 the: volume is not there.

5 One of the site criteria boundaries for Yucca l

l 6 Mountain was that-there was to be zero water infiltration 7 .for 1,000 years. They found radioactive chlorine in Yucca 8 Mountain that could have only come from the bomb tests, i 9 'They found it down in their trenches where they're digging.

10 This is.50 years' water' travel down to Yucca Mountain. They 11 found the. plate movement underneath Yucca Mountain to be ten l

12 times greater than they thought. Water infiltration, they i

l 13 found that there's hairline fractures, subterraneal hairline 14 fractures from all the under;ccound bomb testing. That whole 15 area is just' filled with hairline fractures. , Yucca Mountain 16 is falling on its face, and everybody knows it. Everybody 17 knows it.

18- To start. transporting all of our high-level waste 19 to Yucca' Mountain will take 30 years at a shipment a day.

20- The Department of' Energy estimates 15 accidents a year at 21' that kind of volume of traffic. The casks are not even 22 built yet. We will be shoving waste into Yucca Mountain 23 thatLwill be irretrievable, and it will have to be 24 safeguarded for 240,000 years. This is a geological time

25 frame. This isn't decades or centuries. We could have a l

l l

l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. l Court Reporters  !

1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 l (202) 842-0034 ,

1

1 82 1 damn ice age by then. There's no telling what's going to 2 happen.

3 And you're going to shove this waste into that 4 mountain where it's irretrievable so 30 years from now we 5 -have a better. solution, 50 years,.1,000 years from now we l 6 could have a better solution, and that waste will be 7 irretrievable. This is a very irresponsible, short-sighted, 8 illusion that the utility is creating and that the NRC is 9 backing. And it's not for the people, it's for the 10 liability of this very deadly, lethal, long-lived 11 radioactive waste. And you better start thinking about the 12 people, because we're getting fed up with getting the short 13 end of this "too cheap to meter" friendly atom. It's full 14' of lies. .The whole industry is based on lies.

15 [ Applause.)

16 MR. SHEP.IDAN: Next, Rosemary.

17 MS. BASSILAKIS: Rosemary Bassilakis up again.

18 First of all, I just wanted to comment on the 19 overhead that the NRC presented. You said that there were 20 three nuclear reactors that completed decommissioning 21 already. Shoreham, which operated for how m;ny hours, Mr.

'22 Masnik? About 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br />?

23 Gcllw MR. +EGN4K41 I don't know how many hours it

'24 operated, but it did not operate above 5 percent rated 25 power.

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014

. Washington, * .C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

-s 83 1 MS.'BASSILAKIS: Right. So it's not too 4

2 incredibly radioactive of a challenge. Fort St. Vrain, what 3 kind of nuclear reactor was that?

4 MR. MASNIK: High-temperature gas reactor.

5 MS. BASSILAKIS: Right. Is it true it used helium 6 to cool the fuel rods?

7 MR. KASNIK: The answer is yes.

8 MS. BASSILAKIS: Because it's my understanding 9 that helium doesn't become radioactive, which is actually a 10 very nice feature, in that you'll have less contaminated 11 piping.

12 You also mentioned another nuclear reactor, 13 Pathfinder? I've never heard of it. Can you tell me where 14 and how big that reactor is?

15 MR. MASNIK: It was a small demonstration reactor 16 built a number of years ago.

17 MS bhSSILAKIS: Okay. So those are the three 18 reactors that we've completely decommissioned. That's not a 19 huge track record, and we are definitely still in the 20 experimental stage.

21 Now Jen Gutshall had raised the issue of how many 22 boiling water' reactors have been decommissioned. It's my 23 understanding that they're most in SAFSTOR, and that the Big

/5 24 Rock Point, Ae'the first boiling water reactor right now awwk 25 thef' r- 304 3 uv decommissioning. Is that true?

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

84 1 -MR. MASNIK: Big Rock' Point is,in active i 2 dismantlement. j 3 -

MS. BASSILAKIS: Right. That's the first one.

4' 'And so if Millstone Unit 1 undergoes decommissioning, it 5 would be~the second boiling water reactor to undergo rapid 6 dismantlement.

7 MR. MASNIK: If they choose DECON, it would be the 8 second.

9 MS. BASSILAKIS: Okay. Well, I mean if they do 10_ choose rapid-dismantlement, I'll look over ttJs side of the 11 table, because this is the licensee's side 04 the table. Is 12 that true? 7 13 t'Mk.MASNIK Correct.

14 MS. BASSILAKIS: Well, one of the concerns we 15 .have -- of course we believe in SAFSTOR anyway. Sal 16 Mangiagli pointed that out pretty clearly, that that's the 17 most reasonable stance to take. But if you were to undergo 18 DECON, you would be just the second boiling water reactor to 19 undergo DECON, but also, ica would have to juggle -- you 20 uould have to. juggle dismantling. Unit 1, trying to restart 21 Unit 2, and keeping Unit 3 up to high enough standards to 22 keep operating. I would say that's far more than you can 23 handle at this point in time, and that you really should go 24 for SAFSTOR. It's in everybody's best interest, not just R25 ours, but yours as well.

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036

-(202) 842-0034 i

l 85 1 As far as spent fuel management goes, I think 2 everybody needs to know that we have no say in how the spent 3 fuel is managed. We as community members have no say 4 whether or not it stays in the pool, whether or not it goes 5 in dry casks, anything. And we know this from experience, 6 because CAN -- Citizens Awareness Network -- wanted to be 7 involved with the spent-fuel management. We had questions, 8 concerns that we wanted to raise. And when we first went to 9 a prehearing with the NRC, we were told that during the )

i 10 license termination plan hearing, you will be able to )

l 11 address that issue. It's premature at this point in time. l 12 Well, on January 26 of this year we went before 13 the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, and we were told that 14 we cannot discuss fuel management at all, that that utility 15 can put those -- the fuel rods in dry casks, they can take 16 out the fuel pool, they can do whatever the heck they l l

17 wanted, and we don't have a say. And we consider this a 18 meltdown in democracy. Again, this is wrong. These are 19 issues that vitally affect us and our communities, and we 20 need to have a voice. We shouldn't need to hire lawyers to 21 get a voice, we should have a voice.

22 I guess I'll just -- oh, two more things. One is, 23 you know, Jen Gutshall raised the issue of who the standard 24 was, whether or not it was 150 some odd men or whether the 25 standard was a child. And the NRC likes to look at it as ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NN, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

l 86 1- far as well, you know, we really don't need to protect the 2 worst-case scenario, and we don't believe this is a 3 worst-case scenario. Having a child on site 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />'a day, 4 365 days a year, is reasonable. Kids don't go to school 5 until they're five. Before then, they're home with their 6 mom for the most part. And we want them to be' protected.

7 And this is one of the reasons why CAN is trying to get a 8 hearing on the license-termination plan. We believe NRC 9 needs to take another hard look at their regulation. It is 10 the children we need to protect.

11 And this is important, because unrestricted use l 12 means unrestricted use. It means a family can build their 13 home there and raise their family there. Someone can open 14 up a day-care on Millstone Point. It sounds kind of absurd, 15 but it will happen. It will happen. It might not be for 60 16 years or 70 years or 80 years, but it will happen. And what 17 we -- the things we decide today will impact future 18 generations. And this is so incredibly important. We need 19 to be as protected as possible so we can be assured that 20 future generations will be safe.

21 And lastly, as far as a, you know, the issue of 22 the fuel pool was raised at Millstone Unit 1, and I re' called 23 that the fuel rods in that fuel pool, there's a bunch of 24 them that aren't seated properly. And it keeps getting 25 pushed off and pushed off into the future as far as when ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036.

(202) 842-0034

__________A

87 1 those unseated fuel rods are going to be addressed, and I'm 2 just wondering, are they going to be addressed in the PSDAR, 3 are they going to be addressed in future NRC inspections?

4 When are we going to address this very fact that the fuel 5 rods aren't seated where they're supposed to be seated? And 6 maybe -- I don't know, maybe you guys can't answer that, ,

7 because it's not really your jurisdiction.

8 MR. BELLAMY- Well, I can't answer it, but I'd 9 like to get a little more details of exactly what you mean 10 by unseated, and check with my staff and find out exactly 11 what the situation is.

12 MS. BASSILAKIS: Ron, please do, because they have 13 a whole bunch of unseated fuel rods. They don't know why.

14 They don't know -- because there's tools hanging down there.

15 MR. REYNOLQy: Unseated means that the rack slot 16 that they're designed to be in in the spent-fuel pool 17 they're not --

18 MS, BASSILAKIS: Right.

19 M MR. ISYNOLO.: Geometrically where they're 20 supposed to be. That's your definition of " unseated"?

21 MS. BASSILAKIS: Yes.

22 MR. REYNOLDo: I'll check it out.

23 MS. BASSILAKIS: Good.

24 MR. SHERIDAN: Thank you.

25 Anyone else who would like to speak?

ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 .

Washington, D.C. 20036 l (202) 842-0034 1 3

l 88 1 Paul.

(

2 MR. BLANCH: Tony, I just want to read something 3 from the transcript here.

4 I'm Paul Blanch again. And just related to our 5 followup from my previous statement, Rosemary gave me a copy 6 of the transcript from the meeting of Yankee Rowe. And this 7 is a statement, the criteria that was being used.at Yankee 8 Rowe. And they were committing to 15 millirem a year, and 9 I'm just going to read a couple of lines here from the 10 transcript.

11 When people establish a home on site, they plant a 12 garden and they eat vegetables that are grown in a garden, 13 and we also assume that they put a well on site and drink 14 the ground water that's on site. And when you add all the 15 N

radiation from the exposure from the ground, from any 16 exposure associated with eating the vegetables or drinking 17 the water, the total dose for that must be less than 15 18 millirem per year. That doesn't sound like unrestricted --

19 that is unrectricted access, and I would hope that -- now 20 that is the criteria you're applying, and not eight hours a 21 day. It sounds like someone has made a major, major policy 22 change to increase the allowable exposure from 25 to 87 23 millirem per year.

24 Thank you 25 MR. SHERIDAN: I'd like to thank all of you. This ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

89 1 is the first of what I hope to be several meetings that we 2- will have to discuss this matter. hit's very, very 3 important. I really appreciate the comments that everyone l 4 has made. There are two or three items that I just want to j 5 remind NRC about as we leave. One is there was a question 6E asked that I wasn't clear on the answer, and that is if 7 there was an answer, that is, how much waste is left in the 8 Unit 1 pool. I think we need an answer to that.

9 The second, there was some question about a n1n 10 request -- written request on the clarification of the 20 -M-11 or lower issue. That came up several times, and I think it 12 would be appropriate if we could put that in writing so that 13 everybody has a clear understanding of that.

14 And the third matter is a letter for the record  !

15 from Dr. Wiles on the radiation that you requested.

16 Again, thank you very much, and I hope we can l 17 continue this rapport and help this process along. We all l 18 want to do what's right here.

l 19 MR. WHEELER: As was mentioned at the beginning, l

20 the NRC staff will stick around after the meeting to make 21 ourselves available to continue further discussions with 22 anyone who chooses to do so.

Thank you.

23 [Whereupon, at 9:10 p.m., the meeting was i

24 concluded.]

25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.

Court Reporters 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1014 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 842-0034

1 REPORTER'S CERTZFICATE 1 This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 1

the matter of:

NAME OF PROCEEDING: MILLSTONE UNIT 1, I DECOMMISSIONING PUBLIC MEETING i i

i l

i CASE NUMBER:  ;

l PLACE.OF PROCEEDING: Waterford, CT were held as herein appears, and that this is.the original l

transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me and thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the direction of the court reporting company, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings.

\v -

W /) -

Vic Rasmussen Official Reporter Ann Riley & Associates, Ltd. l

{, i United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission PUBLIC MEETING NRC DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAM .

February 9,1999 Waterford Town Hall Waterford, Connecticut Louis L. Wheeler

onior Project Manager Non-Power Reactw and Decommissioning Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

1

'O

, \ United States

\ ) Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRC STAFF PRESENT Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1

Dr. Seymour H. Weiss, Project Director i Dr. Michael T. Masnik, Section Chief Mr. Phillip M.. Ray, Project Manager Ms. Etoy Hylton, Licensing Assistant 3 Ms. Patricia Milligan, Health Physicist Mr. William C. Huffman, Project Manager Mr. Stephen Dembek, Project Manager Mr. Sam Nalluswami, Project Manager Region I Dr. Ronald R. Bellamy, Branch Chief Mr. Paul C. Cataldo, Millstone Resident Inspector Mr. Neil A. Sheehan, Public Affairs Office j Office of the General Council i

Ms. Ann P. Hodgdon, Senior Attorney l Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguarils Mr. James C. Shepherd, Project Manager l 2

("% United States Q ) Nuclear Regulatory Commission OUTLINE  ;

I O What is/is not Decommissioning 9 NRC Focus 9 Decommissioning Alternatives G Decommissioning Process Requirements 1

'O Post-Shutdown Activities Report i

9 Additional Restrictions  !

I l

9 Financial Considerations 9 The License Termination Plan l

i 9 National Perspective j 9 NRC Staff Points of Contact 9 NRC Inspection Program for Decommissioning Power Plants 3

,fl's United States i

s. Nuclear Regulatory Commission _

WHAT IS DECOMMISSIONING?  !

I Decommissioning is defined as-I The removal of a facility safely from service and the reduction of residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property and termination of the license.

WHAT IS NOT DECOMMISSIONING?

Decommissioning does not include:

9 Non-radiological cleanup / demolition e Site restoration activities e Spent fuel management 1

I 4

~~

l United States i Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRC FOCUS The NRC focus is on the removal of radiological hazards l l

9 Removal of the faility from service l

9 Reduction of radioactive materials to a level that allows site release I S Detailed final radiological survey 9 License termination 5

j~\ United States Q ) Nuclear Regulatory Commission j ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVES l i

l G DECON -- Decontaminate and dismantle j l

G SAFSTOR - Long term storage followed by decontamination and dismantlement G Combination of both I

l i

6 1

I

(('\ United States l

\ .....

Nuclear Regulatory Commission I

)

INITIAL STEPS IN THE PROCESS 9 Licensee Certifications l 99 Operations permanently ceased 1

99 Fuel removed from the reactor vessel l 1

99 Certifications are irreversible 1 9 Operating license no longer authorizes fuel loading 9 Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report 9 Site-specific Cost Estimate 1

7

j'^\ United States

) Nuclear Regulatory Commission POST-SHUTDOWN DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES REPORT (PSDAR)

The PSDAR is required to provide: {

9 A description of planned decommissioning activities 9 A schedule for accomplishment of planned activities 9 An estimate of expected costs 9 Reasons for concluding that environmental impacts are bounded by previously issued environmental impact statements The NRC staff will hold a public meeting in the ,

vicinity of the site. {

The PSDAR is a summary description.

I 8

1 Y' ~~' United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1

FINA ,IAL CONSTRAINTS 9 Limit of 3% of the trust fund for decommissioning planning 9 Limit of 20% prior-to receiving the site-specific cost estimate, provided the PSDAR has been issued 9 Full access not permitted until site-specific cost estimate is issued 9 NRC constraints do not usurp state regulatory constraints b

1 9

f% united states Q ) Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1

ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS The licensee is prohibited from performing any i

decommissioning activity that:

9 Forecloses the release of the site for possible unrestricted use; or 9 Results in significant environmentalimpacts not previously considered; or 9 Results in there no longer being reasonable assurance that adequate funds will be available.

l l

~ >

10  ;

, ~~\ United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission LICENSE TERMINATION PLAN The plan will describe:

S Site characterization G Identification of remaining dismantlement activities 9 Plans for site remediation 9 Detailed plans for the final radiation survey 9 Description of the end use of the site if l restrictions are imposed l 9 Updated site-specific cost estimate of  !

remaining costs l 9 Supplement to the Environmental Report describing any new information  !

i 11 l

United States

\j'~)'s.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission LICENSE TERMINATION PLAN (continued)

O Plan receipt will be noticed in the Federal Register and the plan will be made available for public comment l

9 Opportunity for a hearing on the plan will be given 1

O NRC will also hold a public meeting 9 The plan will be approved by issuance of a license amendment 9 Licensee continues to decommission the site .

and perform a site radiation survey 9 NRC may perform confirmatory surveys 9 The license is terminated if the license termination plan was followed and the site meets the release criteria 12

of%. United States

\ Nuclear Regulatory Commission DECOMMISSIONING PROJECTS 1

21 power reactors are decommissioning l 9 3 facilities completed Pathfinder, Shoreham & Fort St. Vrain 9 5 facilities now being dismantled Trojan, Yankee Rowe, Haddam Neck, Big Rock Point, Maine Yankee 9 12 facilities in long-term storage TMI-2, Dresden 1, Fermi 1, VBWR, La Crosse, Peach Bottom 1, Rancho Seco, San Onofre 1, Indian Point 1, Zion 1, Zion 2, Humboldt Bay 9 1 to be determined - Millstone 1 13

~~\ United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission PDINT OF CONTACT FOR LICENSING ACTIONS U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Louis L. Wheeler Mail Stop: 09-D19 Washington, DC 20555-0001 Telephone: (800) 368-5642 (NRC operator)

(301) 415-1444 E-Mail: DXW@NRC. GOV 14

(

,f, ~.s,,

{ I United States

....I Nuclear Regulatory Commission

, MILLSTONE 1 DECOMMISSIONING MEETING WATERFORD, CONNECTICUT February 9,1999 Ronald R. Bellamy, PhD.

Chief, Decommissioning & Laboratory Branch Division of Nuclear Materials Safety USNRC Region I Presentation: February 9,1999 1 02/05/991:44PM C:sil_dec

., f ~%,, ,

l { } United States l ..... Nuclear Regulaten Commission o Region I will manage the inspection program.

e For a stetion with operating and

permr nently-shutdown reactors, a mix of resident.and regional specialists will perform the inspection activity.

e Present resident effort is periodic

[approximately monthly? tours of Unit 1, attendance at planning meetings approximately weekly, availn.ble as necessary for interaction with the licensee. Also keeps the regional office and headquarters staff aware of developments.

Presentatiors: Fe*>ruary 9,1999 2 02/05/99 h44PM C: mil _dec

~

( ) United States

....l Nuclear Regulatory Commission e Region I has been involved in a number of ongoing reactor decommissioning projects e Yankee Rowe is completing dismantlement and decontamination e Maine Yankee has completed site characterization and has selected a Decommissioning Operations

~

Contractor. A spent fuel nuclear island has been established and major dismantlement and

' decommissioning efforts are expected to begin Spring 1999.

Presentation: Tebrwy 9,1999 3 o2iosios 1:stru c:mir_sec

p- ~s.,,

( ) United States

..... NuclearRegulatory Commission e Haddam Neck is continuing its I characterization effort and is completing modifications for a spent fuel nuclear island. Major dismantlement and decontamination efforts are expected to begin mid 1999.

e Peach Bottom 1 is in a long-term storage SAFSTOR condition 1

e Three Mile Island 2 is in a long-term .

SAFSTOR condition l

e Indian Point 1 is in a long-term SAFSTOR condition L-a- ,n-, ,. in 4 onn, ,:ana c:.u sa

('

) UnitedStates

..... Nuclear Regulatory Commission e For reactors in SAFSTOR, the inspection effort is a periodic inspection Kapproximately annually?

to verify the condition of the facility and that degradation has not occurred, supplemented by frequent observations by the resident staff e For reactors in dismantlement and decontamination, a structured inspection program is established, based on the activities at the site.

  • Areas of inspection are:

- Organization, Management and Cost Controls

- Safety Reviews, Changes. and Presentation: February 9,1999 S wosm 1:aru c:ma_dec

p* ~%,,,

{ } United States

. . . . . ' Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Modifications

- Self-assessments, Audits, Corrective Actions

- Decommissioning Performance, Status

- Preparations for Reactor Fuel Handling

- Reactor Fuel Handling

- Maintenance and Surveillance

- Cold Weather Preparations

- Spent Fuel Pool Safety

- Occupational Radiation Exposure

- Final Surveys

- Radwaste Treatment, Effluents, Environmental Monitoring

- Solid Radwaste Management and Transrartation Presentation: February 9,1999 6 02/05/991:MPM C: mil.dec

- - - - - _ _ _ - - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ i

f ~s.,,

l ) United States

..... Nuclear Regulatory Commission

- Evaluation of Emergency Preparedness

- Physical Security G Public involvement will continue.

Inspection reports will continue to be made available, staff will attend meetings as appropriate.

- The resident staff can be contacted at 860-447-3170

- The Region I office can be contacted at 610-337-5000 or 800-432.-1156.

Presentation: February 9,1999 7 02/05/99 1:44PM C: mil _dec

ll l llll l 1 ll 1

s t

u t

a S

g s i

n i e

c 1

n g n9 v

r t

i n i t9 nS e

na e9 e1 e

he UlP M,9 tt oSi e g cyr R-n n i l

ba Cn

.t oi uu ke s n t Prb ndi l o Ce a r s e y g

l i RF Fr r i

s P e Ms i N e c E n

r i

V a m l e

c m u N

o t s

c a e h e

D t r

o s ' N ll

l l' ,  !!l ll

- s o

n t

a e s h i v

t i

e t Cs t

cn e o n Rt n i

t t f i i r f t v uNe a ep s c o i

t e fo m t t c h e r e eg .

Rl ei n l

t A i n vuai oq 2 sn t a di o n t n e mrleyi t p n ns e

r i

a ryrpU as i

y g

r r mt st oatr r t em e e oam n

u y ea p u o E

C l ul e q ug p ac l r

a e

a egn f

u ve l c

u SRrleoSEd N t

+ + + + s a

e h

t r

o s / N -

l1l ll l ll Ill!

l l illlli l ,

- x i

s e hs e l l

a r e

r t 't rn B st c r o u sth f

oed on ue e hs at di e s Todnb i nn o oa 1

t ie l

a i

ze nP r

sta cmt s nh gU er td o e Ut r o cN ue s e un t e a v e r e npinyniy t t ni r c eo yt h

iOha t

n pp o,ci l

o o nde a v l

th nt o fe se typ mo ofa ee op r

rr ei c w et Caisf l h a nfrm rn se y

g r

sS pa s roei r p y am wevd E e

n unl nai l e e yi k b tds1 l

erti r

a co O rk er vo rmfea o u ate aihw r a l e

c OwWnSsyUaA e nc u F N t

+ t + + s 2 a e

h t

r o

s / N ll'

l I l1 1

' x ye s e r

ai a wb l

et t de emhn r t rm o

e p

n e

m ns f i s s

Us sh ws e e A ed s

s rl i

vn a a e u ea r r r

e sF ee vf d

n n s ie t

owsn i nar s s e t. s e i

u y g

r e

aN h l e E n

i tl ee r ug r l u r a

ol e pf od r e l e

c g m wph u eS o e n c CniS N

t Not + +

s a

e h

t r

o

/ N l1 ll ll li l l 1

Il II11

- s g

n s s n

r e i

r o e c U t c nfoN e

i ni n or et emr o c y

ptf ai M xSn t

i e yo l n ybc a u r c mts sC yR i

g mu od eN v

l o c n rd i

u n o t o ms a y e ot i

n t g d vf r e u r e

a i s gdin t c

E n

R n n oiee c s r a

e t

e p n r e pnl t n u l

c u

s a s N i

s e e do e t f RL I nCr s a

f e

+ + + h O t r

o s - N lll l

,l l  ! l1 1 j\ )

\

y e

v r

u -

S sk l

d r a s l eP al l c n i f

i f

i go ed l

t n a ta a l

oit l

o a b dr S L ic sd r do o s o aL f ef r y r n e g R tek r t r

e n

e a a a E t

i WHW l r

a e

f s .

+ ++

N c

u f t s

O h a

e t

r o

s / N I ll

1 , l ll 1

- \

y t

v i

t s i t

n c .

e a s d oeh n e m e

i dt i o

d r af r o a t

u u l s s s d yo c c a n e e a s e nl n c ay i mc l y u t e d av s n s n a o r y ono a rd pe u e

i t s ait e -

ece t y v

r i

d i al p net i r

g e

u ad r m ot ef s E n

a r a t

sdf o r S t cd s l

l i l a

e el l c

r eio M u i

i N

DF S o t s

+++ N a e

h t

r o

s / N l

l

- s 9 d 9

/ e 1

/ nt c e t 7 o e v A b i

ytafah f a s .

i y de t s s .

d oe e1 a mni t i nt e r

e r

s v i i Kd et e c mi t dn 2 a aU Y e n s

y g e si n Ren b el o

l i

wg ne n 0o t s ala r p 0t s mo .

y 0s l i

l at e t s

y c

g r

e 2l i oi l n E n

e e rM a

g1 ni t f u g r a

e e o nt nt n n i l

c U e ngu u Y

i t

a op N t o e t s

SNSCb a e

+ + + + h t

r o

' / N l ll ll

I l 1 I 1Il 1l

~

' s i

n s

s u

nu t i ot a ya e rt t

as t

st os c d t t a ead e i

f i e d ul ul cle p q ege e u pf U r e u se rf e y t l d r ntcd e ea at cc t

o mf l n

i nle d ei a n r s hfew c r e l

u eot e i y mt n t ove g r

g ade l t a s r e

n e emn et t e o nU E

r R sir i oN a e

nmitu di sli i l c

u ebq c u d ei n v a N i

L sr e Arf t

s a

e

+ + h t

r o

' / N lll

. l llllllll i

- ' \

g n g i n g n i n n i

o o i

i nb e

s s o o s o s )C st i

i i

w mO s) m t he m (D o r i RmAa r

m ti t i

s c o mDe o w et oSy nDc c c s of a n e (P s i e ost ot r Dt h n rt D i n e o nor pa sC wpet t

r ol p u oe a y f

o g gsdRl g r

e ng n nt us de n g i nio ti het E n wi at i

ti t r

a aSim t

i ear u r t v l e

c e sitb i

n- ve ep l

a vp oc u N u

n a +RoEOPAs t

s a

l

+ + e h

P t r

o s / N

! l l l i

l l 1lllll!llj!!l I ll

- s r

9 s e 9 s t

/

7 e

r r

a 5 8 8 - g u 9- 9- 9- 9 9- 8 o r Q 9 4- 1 2- 9 p 9 2- 2 9- / - dr /

1 2 n 2 s1 7 1 2 1 i 3 1 e

n t

o g

s s n l

e l t

t a

i n

o C

. i d O mss i i e

M t t g b i D

r i

mgn i n

S u m f

o j

on wub i t

e t

e e y r

m o R s e y g

r o S e M o c A U e ad r M c t

a D e D n E n

Mt h u t t

e e

i c i l

b l

u g h e S P

o n

r a

e u

l S L b e iusl t o l c

~1 u P R l

b de i

i u

2 P mi s N C ta h t 8 i y b c t n 0 U R e sc u e s U 5 N N K ES S D a e

+ + + + + + h

+ + t r

o

' / N II

Y ..

J-STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION January 21,1999 e ,0 The Honorable Thomas A. Sheridan First Selectman Ev Town of Waterford

!E d=

15 Rope Ferry Rd., @ :q Kh Waterford, CT 06385 ,

=, y

Dear Mr. Sheridan:

9 I would like to take this opportunity to share with you some information regarding activities conducted by the Depanment of Environmental Protections' Division of Radiation (DEP-DOR).

These activities center around the radiological survey of the Millstone Balifields, and some pertinent information regarding thermoluminescent dosimeters that were utilized to measure exposure to ionizing radiation.

Millstone Balifields. The Division conducted an in depth radiological survey of the following balifields: Rolf, Rotary, Patterson, Babe Ruth, Spera, Greco, Mullins and the Hall Playground Area. The DEP-DOR collected 412 surface soil samples composited into 103 containers for analysis. I15 subsurface and 17 background samples were collected and analyzed. All soil samples were collected, stored and transported under the DEP-DOR agency chain of custody guidelines. The samples were analyzed for alpha, bets ard gamma radiation utilizing established analysis techniques by art independent certified laboratory. The results of the soil sample analysis yield naturally occurring radioactivity and the presence ofisotopes related to weapons fall out which can be considered in both instances to be " background". The DEP-DOR also conducted direct measurements to detect gamma radiation. These direct radiation measurements involved the use cifsodium iodide (Nal) type detectors. These detectors were utilized for surface area scans, intermittent surface level crect measurements and intermittent waist level direct measurements. The entire surface area of each of the seven balifields and playground were surveyed. Waist and ground level measurements were accomplished approximately every ten feet. Numerous areas were discovered that had variations in background radiation levels up to five times background. All of these anomalics where attributed td s ocks, stones or gravel which contain higher concentrations of naturally occurring radioactivity than surficial material. The remaining areas yielded results consistent with ,

background radiation levels in Southeastern Connecticut.

Environmental Monitoring Program. Untilits termination in January 1998 the DEP DOR participated in an Cooperative Agreement with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (U.S NRC). This agreement tasked the DEP-DOR to collect various environmental media to be analyzed for radioactivity content at the State Department ofHealth Laboratory. Additionally, (r,s.i.e nuns a rep.,)

79 als st,ut

  • Estr.ed, c7 04104 s127 betpJ/dep.asste.st.se An Equal oppersmalry Employer

/.

/ ,.

Page 2 -

Date Sheridan Memo DEP-DOR was responsible for the placement and retrieval of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's) that were provided by the NRC on a quarterly basis. These dosimeters were positioned in a concentric pattern around the Haddam neck and Millstone Point facilities. The NRC utilized the "UD 800 series" Panasonic TLD's which afford excellent energy resolution throughout the range of expected exposures that members of the general public could possibly be exposed to during an offsite release of radioactivity during a nuclear power plant incident. The measured radiation levels are reported in units ofmilliroentgen. They are quarterly gross exposures and ,

include expostres received while the dosimeters were in transit as well as exposures received in the field. A control TLD, accompanies the TLD shipment during transit and was stored in a low background area while the other TLD's were in the field. 'Ihe results of the quarterly exposure was published by the NRC. The DEP-DOR was responsible for the emplacement ofretrieval of these TLD's. Additionally, the DEP-DOR received from the utility various environmental samples that were analyzed by the Department of Health radiochemistry laboratory. The results of the analysis of these samples were reported to the NRC by the DEP-DOR in an annual report.

I trust that this memo has provided you with some pertinent information with regards to activities that the DEP DOR has performed in and around the Millstone Station area. Ifyou need further clarification on any of these issues, or ifI can provide you with further infonnation please feel ,

free to contact me at telephone number (860) 424-3029.

Sincerely, .

YN Edward L. Wilds Jr. P.hD Director Division of Radiation -

Bureau of Air Management

.s e

h

'.*

  • f
  • y

_ _ - . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20205D776&oldid=3060607"